Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment

Revision of Development and Restoration Scheme at Ballidon Quarry, Ballidon, Peak District National Park

Report Reference: CE-BQ0776-RP01 - FINAL

Produced by Crestwood Environmental Ltd.

3 June 2015 This report has been prepared in good faith, with all reasonable skill, care and diligence, based on information provided or known available at the time of its preparation and within the scope of work agreement with the client.

We disclaim any responsibility to the client and others in respect of any matters outside the scope of the above.

The report is provided for the sole use of the named client and is confidential to them and their professional advisors. No responsibility is accepted to others.

Crestwood Environmental Ltd. 1 & 2 Nightingale Place Pendeford Business Park Wobaston Road Wolverhampton WV9 5HF

Tel: 01902 824 037

Email: info@crestwoodenvironmental.co.uk Web: www.crestwoodenvironmental.co.uk CONTENTS

1 INTRODUCTION .................................................................................................................. 3 1.1 BACKGROUND .............................................................................................................. 3 1.2 CONTEXT ....................................................................................................................... 3 1.3 KEY WORK .................................................................................................................... 4 1.4 OUTLINE METHODOLOGY .......................................................................................... 4

2 BASELINE SITUATION - LANDSCAPE ASPECTS ............................................................. 6 2.1 LANDSCAPE POLICY .................................................................................................. 6 2.2 LANDSCAPE DESIGNATIONS ..................................................................................... 10 2.3 REGISTERED PARKS AND GARDENS ........................................................................ 10 2.4 LISTED BUILDINGS, SCHEDULED MONUMENTS AND CONSERVATION AREAS ....... 10 2.5 HISTORIC LAND-USE AND COVER .......................................................................... 11 2.6 TREE PRESERVATION ORDERS .................................................................................. 11 2.7 RIGHTS OF WAY AND OPEN ACCESS LAND .............................................................. 11 2.8 LANDSCAPE CHARACTER ......................................................................................... 12 2.9 LANDSCAPE VALUE .................................................................................................. 18

3 BASELINE SITUATION - VISUAL ASPECTS ..................................................................... 20 3.1 INTRODUCTION .......................................................................................................... 20 3.2 VISIBILITY ................................................................................................................... 20 3.3 VIEWPOINTS ............................................................................................................... 21

4 LANDSCAPE AND VISUAL ASSESSMENT ...................................................................... 22 4.1 ASSUMPTIONS AND LIMITATIONS ............................................................................ 22 4.2 PREDICTED POTENTIAL IMPACTS ............................................................................. 23 4.3 IMPACT AVOIDANCE AND MITIGATION MEASURES .............................................. 23 4.4 EFFECTS ON LANDSCAPE CHARACTERISTICS AND CHARACTER ....................... 24 4.5 EFFECTS ON VISUAL AMENITY ................................................................................ 28 4.6 EFFECTS ON OTHER VISUAL RECEPTORS ............................................................... 40 4.7 SEQUENTIAL CUMULATIVE IMPACTS ....................................................................... 41

5 SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS ...................................................................................... 41 5.1 DESIGN AND ASSESSMENT ....................................................................................... 41 5.2 LANDSCAPE AND VISUAL EFFECTS ......................................................................... 41 5.3 CONCLUSION .............................................................................................................. 41

LIST OF TABLES: Table 1 Landscape Guidelines ............................................................................................... 15 Table 2 Landscape Value of the Locality ............................................................................... 19 Table 3 Viewpoints (VPs) .................................................................................................... 21 Table 4 Predicted Potential Impacts ..................................................................................... 23 Table 5 Summary of Assessment of Significance of Landscape Effects ............................... 28 Table 6 Summary Visual Sensitivity of Receptors at Viewpoints (VPs) ................................. 30 LIST OF APPENDICES: APPENDIX 1 METHODOLOGY AND METHOD OF ASSESSMENT APPENDIX 2 FIGURES APPENDIX 3 LANDSCAPE GUIDELINES

LIST OF FIGURES IN APPENDIX: Figure L1: Landscape Context Plan Figure L2: Visibility Analysis Plan Figure L3: Viewpoint 1 Figure L4: Viewpoint 2 Figure L5: Viewpoint 3 Figure L6: Viewpoint 4 Figure L7: Viewpoint 5 Figure L8: Viewpoint 6 Figure L9: Viewpoint 6 Photomontage Figure L10: Viewpoint 7 Figure L11: Viewpoint 8 Figure L12: Viewpoint 9 Figure L13: Viewpoint 10 Figure L14: Viewpoint 11 Figure L15: Viewpoint 12 Figure L16: Viewpoint 12 Photomontage 1 INTRODUCTION

1.1 BACKGROUND

1.1.1 Crestwood Environmental Ltd (‘Crestwood’), a Registered Practice of the Landscape Institute, were commissioned by Lafarge Tarmac to undertake a Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment (LVIA) of proposals to revise the development and restoration scheme (‘the Proposed Development’) at Ballidon Quarry, (‘the Site’). The Site is divided into two main quarry areas (West Quarry and Woodbarn Quarry (shown as Hoe Grange Quarry on OS maps)), linked via a short informal private access road.

1.1.2 The location of the Site and its surrounding context are provided on Figure L1. The Site is located north of the small settlement of Ballidon, Derbyshire and lies within the Peak District National Park. The Site is centred on NGR: SK 20070 55500 and covers an area of circa 67.5 hectares (ha).

1.1.3 A detailed description of the Proposed Development is included in the accompanying planning application. In summary, the Proposed Development consists of:

- Reduction in height of, and reallocation of mineral waste from, ‘Tip 3’, located near the southern boundary of the Site; and
- A revised restoration scheme (including revised landform and habitat/land-use and progressive implementation (in six phases).

1.1.4 Specifically, the Proposed Development involves the partial removal of Tip 3 on the Southern Boundary of the quarry and using this material to bury and restore the high faces in the Western Quarry. This will be undertaken over a two year period, and will result in the sterilisation of deeper currently permitted reserves. However the loss of these reserves will be offset by modifying the development scheme to recover reserves previously inaccessible beneath Tip 3.

1.1.5 No increase in reserves will result from the Proposed Development and there will be no change in any of the other operating conditions at the Site. A significantly improved restoration scheme (allowing faces within West Quarry to be restored to a top-to-bottom slope (resembling a steep valley side) will be achieved, along with more sustainable quarry operations. The life of the consent will remain unchanged.

1.2 CONTEXT

1.2.1 Ballidon Quarry has been producing high purity carboniferous limestone since the 1950’s. The quality of the stone is such that it is sold predominantly into industrial markets for use as fillers in paints, plastics, animal feeds, pharmaceuticals and numerous other applications.

1.2.2 The current consent granted in 2004 permits the extraction of up to 1.1 million tonnes of limestone per annum, with a minimum 40% being sold into the industrial section. The current permission expires in 2040.

1.2.3 Readily available mineral reserves at Ballidon Quarry are limited, with some 5.0 million tonnes lying beneath quarry waste tips and beneath ground water in West Quarry. Whilst the reserves could be worked, their extraction would result in a restoration scheme comprising predominantly of steep sided quarry faces and the operations would be considered to be less sustainable than the permitted development.

1.3 KEY WORK

1.3.1 Crestwood have undertaken the following key tasks:

- A review of the planning documentation context for the Site;
- A desktop study and web search of relevant background documents and maps, including reviews of aerial photographs, LPA publications and other landscape character assessments;
- Collated information about relevant landscape designations;
- A field assessment of local site circumstances including a photographic survey, undertaken by a Chartered Landscape Architect, in suitable weather conditions during October 2014 and January 2015;
- Feedback into the design of the Proposed Development to avoid or minimise adverse impacts, including residual effects of the restored site; and
- An analysis of the likely landscape and visual effects arising from the Proposed Development, which includes an assessment of the significance of any effects arising, based on their nature (positive or negative), magnitude and the sensitivity of the receiving environment.

1.4 OUTLINE METHODOLOGY

1.4.1 This assessment considers the acceptability of the Proposed Development in the location proposed. It is based on a data trawl and a field visit to identify the most sensitive landscape and visual receptors, and considers their ability to accommodate the change proposed. The full method of assessment and methodology used is provided in Appendix 1 and, for the purposes accessibility, and summarised below, but it is strongly recommended that the assessment be read after the method of assessment and methodology is fully understood.

1.4.2 This assessment is conducted with regard to the principles set out in:

1. Landscape Assessment Guidance for England and Scotland (Countryside Agency and Scottish Natural Heritage, April 2002);
2. Guidelines for Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment 3rd Edition (The Landscape Institute, 2013) – referred to as ‘GLVIA’;
3. Photography and Photomontage in Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment (Advice Note 01/11) (Landscape Institute, 2011); and
4. An Approach to Landscape Character Assessment (Christine Tudor (Natural England), 2014).

1.4.3 The GLVIA document sets out a range of techniques and approaches which practitioners are advised to use when conducting Landscape and Visual Impact Assessments (LVIsAs) and Landscape and Visual Appraisals (LVAs), especially when carried out as part of an Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) (paragraph 1.4). The intent of the GLVIA is to present a general overview of a ‘non-prescriptive’ methodology for undertaking assessments of developments: “It is always the primary responsibility of any landscape professional carrying out an assessment to ensure that the approach and methodology adopted are appropriate to the particular circumstances” (GLVIA, paragraph 1.20).

1.4.4 This assessment accords with the general principles of the GLVIA and is considered appropriately detailed to confidently assess the acceptability of both the principle and details of development in this location.

1.4.5 The assessment is undertaken in the context of the landscape being dynamic, as is made clear within the GLVIA (Para 2.13): “Landscape is not unchanging. Many different pressures have progressively altered familiar landscapes over time and will continue to do so in the future, creating new landscapes. Today many of these drivers of change arise from the requirements for development to meet the needs of a growing and changing population and economy”. This does not mean that any change is acceptable change, but it also means that change in the landscape is likely and that this should be channelled in a managed direction.

1.4.6 The nature of landscape and visual assessment requires both objective analysis and subjective professional judgement. Accordingly, the following assessment is in accordance with the principles of the guidance listed above, information and data analysis techniques and subjective professional judgement where necessary, and is based on clearly defined terms. An explanation of terms and abbreviations used are provided at the end of the assessment text and the methodology and method of assessment used is provided in Appendix 1.

1.4.7 In this assessment, the initial study area extended to 3km in all directions from the edge of the Site, as beyond this distance it is predicted that there would not be the potential for the Proposed Development to result in any significant landscape and visual effects.

1.4.8 An initial broad area of search for potential viewpoint locations was carried out using specialist digital terrain modelling and analysis software which was used to calculate a Zone of Theoretical Visibility (ZTV) of the Proposed Development, based on the ‘target points’ shown on Figure L2, assuming a ‘bare earth’ situation (i.e. not taking into account any topographical features other than landform). This potential visibility was then checked ‘in the field’, taking into account potential sensitive landscape and visual receptors.

1.4.9 It should be noted that the actual visibility is a much smaller area than the ZTV indicates, as the ZTV does not take into account the screening effects of vegetation or buildings (for example) and may coincide with areas without sensitive viewpoints or public access.

1.4.10 Using professional judgement, Landscape Characteristics have been initially assessed for potential sensitivity to change and a decision made as to whether individual characteristics can be scoped-out of further assessment. Where not scoped-out, assessment of these characteristics is undertaken in further detail, on the basis of the level of effects on these characteristics potentially being a material consideration, and presented as part of the assessment. Assessment of effects on Landscape Character is undertaken separately, taking into account all landscape characteristics, including those scoped-out of individual assessment. 2 BASELINE SITUATION - LANDSCAPE ASPECTS

2.1 LANDSCAPE POLICY

2.1.1 The current policy framework for planning control relating specifically to the Site is provided by the Development Plan comprised of the relevant policies described below.

European Landscape Convention

2.1.2 The UK is a signatory to the Council of Europe’s European Landscape Convention which promotes landscape protection, management and planning. The UK Government has stated that it considers the UK to be compliant with the ELC’s requirements and that the principal requirements of the ELC are already enshrined in the existing suite of national policies and guidance on the assessment of landscape and visual effects.

2.1.3 It is important to recognise that the ELC does not require the preservation of all landscapes although landscape protection is one of the core themes of the convention. Equally important though is the requirement to manage and plan future landscape change.

National Planning Policy - Landscape

2.1.4 An appreciation of the ‘weight’ to be attributed to any landscape effects arising from development starts with an understanding of the planning context within which any such development is to be tested for its acceptability.

2.1.5 It is stated in paragraph 14 of the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) (Department for Communities and Local Government, 2012) that “At the heart of the National Planning Policy Framework is a presumption in favour of sustainable development, which should be seen as a golden thread running through both plan-making and decision-taking’. It goes on to state that in terms of Council decision making this means that ‘where the development plan is absent, silent or relevant policies are out of date, granting permission unless any adverse impacts of doing so would significantly and demonstrably outweigh the benefits, when assessed against the policies in this Framework taken as a whole; or specific policies in this Framework indicate development should be restricted”.

2.1.6 Paragraph 115 of the NPPF states: “Great weight should be given to conserving landscape and scenic beauty in National Parks, the Broads and Areas of Outstanding Natural Beauty, which have the highest status of protection in relation to landscape and scenic beauty. The conservation of wildlife and cultural heritage are important considerations in all these areas, and should be given great weight in National Parks and the Broads”.

2.1.7 Policy guidance on the English National Parks is also provided in “English National Parks and the Broads UK Government Vision and Circular 2010” (Defra, 2010) and is due for review in 2015. It provides a vision for the English National Parks (and the Broads): 2.1.8 Under Paragraph 141 of this document, under ‘mineral working’, it states “The Parks are a vital source of some of the minerals that society and the economy needs, including certain building stone and small quarries which provide building materials to maintain the character of the local built heritage. Quarry works may also provide employment within the Park boundary. It is important therefore that the need for minerals and the impacts of extraction and processing on people and the environment are managed in an integrated way.”

Local Planning Policy

2.1.9 The Site lies within the Peak District National Park. The Peak District National Park Authority (PDNPA) is the sole planning authority for land and property within the Peak District National Park and acts as the Minerals Planning Authority. Whilst considering the planning needs of the area, the PDNPA is required to have regard to the purposes of the National Park designation:

- Conserve and enhance the natural beauty, wildlife and cultural heritage; and
- Promote opportunities for the understanding and enjoyment of the special qualities of national parks by the public.

If there’s a conflict between these two purposes, conservation takes priority.

2.1.10 A number of planning policy documents apply, including:

- Local Development Framework Core Strategy;
- Peak District Local Plan Saved Policies; and
- Minerals Strategic Action Plan. 2.1.11 Planning Practice Guidance (Department for Communities and Local Government, n.d.) states that National Park Authorities “should have regard to management plans for National Parks..., as these documents underpin partnership working and delivery of designation objectives. The management plans highlight the value and special qualities of these designations to society and show communities and partners how their activity contributes to protected landscape purposes.

National Parks... management plans do not form part of the statutory development plan, but may contribute to setting the strategic context for development by providing evidence and principles, which should be taken into account in the local planning authorities’ Local Plans and any neighbourhood plans in these areas.

National Parks and Areas of Outstanding Natural Beauty management plans may also be material considerations in making decisions on individual planning applications, where they raise relevant issues.”

Peak District National Park Local Development Framework Core Strategy

2.1.12 A number of relevant policies from the Local Development Framework Core Strategy (Peak District National Park Authority, Adopted 2011), including:

- GSP2: Enhancing the National Park.
- L1: Landscape character and valued characteristics.
- L2: Sites of biodiversity or geo-diversity importance.
- L3: Cultural heritage assets of archaeological, architectural, artistic or historic significance.
- MIN1: Minerals development.
- MIN4: Mineral safeguarding.

2.1.13 The Core Strategy states, in 9.14, “Core policies for landscapes and conservation will contribute to the spatial outcomes as follows:

- Across the whole National Park policies will:

  - Apply strict protection of the Natural Zone;
  - Manage development through careful consideration of landscape character;
  - Conserve and enhance Conservation Areas;
  - Support work with partners to reduce the size and amount of road signage in open landscapes;
  - Conserve and enhance green infrastructure.

- Across the White Peak and Derwent Valley policies will:

  - Protect and manage the distinctive and valued historic character of the settled, agricultural landscapes of the White Peak, while seeking opportunities to enhance the wild character and diversity of remoter areas; · Protect and manage the settled, agricultural character of the Derwent Valley landscapes, seeking opportunities to enhance wooded character, cultural heritage and biodiversity;

· Manage floodplain landscapes to increase flood storage and enhance biodiversity;

· Protect and manage the tranquil pastoral landscapes and distinctive cultural character of the Derbyshire Peak Fringe through sustainable landscape management, seeking opportunities to enhance woodlands, wetlands, cultural heritage and biodiversity.”

Peak District Local Plan Saved Policies

2.1.14 A number of relevant policies from the 2001 Local Plan have been saved “until the Local Development Framework Core Strategy fully replaces them” (Peak District National Park, n.d.):

- Policy LM1: Assessing and minimising the environmental impact of mineral activity.
- Policy LM9: Ancillary mineral development.
- Policy LC1: Conserving and managing the Natural Zone.
- Policy LC4: Design, layout and landscaping.
- Policy LC6: Listed Buildings.
- Policy LC15: Historic and cultural heritage sites and features.
- Policy LC17: Sites, features or species of wildlife, geological or geomorphological importance.
- Policy LC18: Safeguarding, recording and enhancing nature conservation interests when development is acceptable.
- Policy LC19: Assessing the nature conservation importance of sites not subject to statutory designation.
- Policy LC20: Protecting trees, woodlands or other landscape features put at risk by development.

Peak District Minerals Strategic Action Plan

2.1.15 The PDNPA also has a Minerals Strategic Action Plan (Peak District National Park Authority, 2003) which is primarily concerned with implementing policy and deciding how the Authority applies its statutory planning function to minerals applications.

Peak District National Park Management Plan

2.1.16 The Peak District National Park Management Plan (Peak District National Park Authority, n.d.) consists of a vision and four linked strategic themes which set out aims for the National Park. In turn, each of themes has four outcomes that give details of the actions needed to achieve those aims. Specific relevant Delivery Outcomes include ‘DL1’ and ‘DL2’.

2.1.17 DL 1 Landscape: The diverse national park landscapes will adapt to challenges whilst retaining their special qualities and natural beauty. The delivery aims for this are: • Address demand for development whilst conserving and enhancing the special qualities of the national park, in keeping with the Landscape Strategy and Character Assessment;

• Deliver conservation on a landscape scale through a diverse range of models, in keeping with the Landscape Character Assessment and supporting adaptation to climate change;

• Ensure that the conservation of landscape character areas extends beyond the national park boundaries;

• Support farms and other rural businesses to achieve national park purposes; and

• Highlight the impacts of inappropriate lighting, and promote the opportunities for dark skies with residents, businesses and Peak District Dark Skies group.

2.1.18 **DL 3 Biodiversity and ecosystems:** The richness of the natural environment will be conserved, restored and enhanced so wildlife can thrive, ecological systems continue to improve and its diverse geology is retained and valued. The delivery aims for this are:

• Conserve and enhance geo and bio-diversity by continued action for priority habitats, sites and species within the national park in line with the Biodiversity Action Plan;

• On development sites ensure geodiversity and biodiversity interests are protected and where possible enhanced;

• Focus on the natural environment, ecosystem services and the part we play in these systems through integrated action and fostering greater understanding;

• Manage river water quality and supply within the National Park; and

• Respond appropriately and adequately to new animal and plant health risks and invasive species.

2.2 **LANDSCAPE DESIGNATIONS**

2.2.1 The Site and lies within the Peak District National Park, in Ballidon Parish, Derbyshire, with the boundary of the Park lying 725m to the east at its nearest point. This also forms the western boundary of the Derbyshire Dales District administrative area (see Figures L1 and L2).

2.2.2 No part of the Site lies within or within 3km of a non-statutorily designated landscape such as a Special Landscape Area.

2.3 **REGISTERED PARKS AND GARDENS**

2.3.1 No part of the Site lies within or within 3km of a Registered Park or Garden.

2.4 **LISTED BUILDINGS, SCHEDULED MONUMENTS AND CONSERVATION AREAS**

2.4.1 A formal assessment of the historical setting of these heritage features falls outside the scope of this LVIA, but the issues are addressed as part of the Cultural Heritage study set out in Section 4 of the ES. However, in the course of Crestwood’s desktop study and assessment of the Site, the following was found (see Figure L1): 2.4.2 There is one listed building within the Site itself; this being the Operator’s offices building. This is a Grade II listed former farmhouse. A number of Listed Buildings lie within 3km of the Site. The majority of these are largely contained in the nearby village of Parwich (35 of the 48 total). Seven are situated on the approach road to the Site, in and around the settlement of Ballidon.

2.4.3 A number of Scheduled Monuments also lie within 1km of the Site, with a small number being close to the Site’s boundary (to the immediate north). Several more are dispersed across the wider area, within 3km of the Site’s boundary. The Scheduled Monuments consist largely of Prehistoric and Romano-British settlements, field layouts and barrows. Conservation Areas are present at Ballidon and at Parwich.

2.5 HISTORIC LAND-USE AND COVER

2.5.1 The Site was previously comprised of medium-large sized agricultural fields with rectilinear boundaries; it is likely that these were dry stone walls. The Site was, in general, an open and agrarian area typical of the surrounding landscape, with steeper areas being more wooded/scrubby, as survives in part today. Historic maps show the land use change to quarrying between 1955 and 1975.

2.6 TREE PRESERVATION ORDERS

2.6.1 The co-ordinators of this development project have indicated that there are no Tree Preservation Orders (TPO) affecting the Site.

2.7 RIGHTS OF WAY AND OPEN ACCESS LAND

2.7.1 A number of public rights of way (PRoWs) are present in the vicinity of the Site (see Figure L2); the nearest being a footpath (FP6) that runs between the two quarry areas (east-west), and another (FP5) that runs largely east-west to the south of the Site. There is also a track running in a largely north-south direction immediately east of the Site – labelled on OS maps as ‘other route with public access’.

2.7.2 Two promoted recreational public routes pass within 1km of the Site:

- Pennine Bridleway National Trail (550m to the northeast at its nearest point, running generally northwest-southeast); and
- Limestone Way bridleway (long distance path, 585m to the south at its nearest point, running east-west generally).

2.7.3 The Pennine Bridleway route is also shared in part by the Midshires Way, London to Edinburgh path, London To Newhaven Crossing, the High Peak Trail and National Cycle Route 54.

2.7.4 The Limestone Way also shares part of its route with the Dovedale Round circular route and the Peakland Way (to the south of Parwich).

2.7.5 The Tissington Trail (which is also National Cycle Route 68) passes circa 2.65km to the southwest.

2.7.6 Other pertinent nearby footpaths (within 1km) include:

- FP10 c. 60m west, running southwestwards;

- FP11 and 12 (joins Parwich FP10), c. 450m west, running north-south – which also shares its path with the Peakland Way;

- FP3, c. 760m south running southwards from Ballidon; and

- FP8, c. 490m to the north, running northeastwards.

2.7.7 There are a small number of areas of Access Land near to the Site (see Figure L2), including:

- A long narrow stretch of land on a west-facing valley side immediately east of the Site;
- An area surrounding Roystone Rocks, 500m to the north; and
- An area circa 410m to the east, at its nearest point.
- A short permissive route (provided under a Natural England farm conservation scheme) links up from footpath FP8 (at its junction with Gallowlow Lane (track)) running northeastwards to Minninglow Hill and then northwestwards to link up with the High Peak Trail.

2.8 LANDSCAPE CHARACTER

Introduction

2.8.1 Landscape and visual assessment is comprised of a study of two separate but inter-linked components:

- **Landscape character** – which is the physical make up and condition of the landscape itself. Landscape character arises from a distinct, recognisable and consistent pattern of physical and social elements, aesthetic factors and perceptual aspects; and
- **Visual amenity** – which is the way in which the Site is seen and appreciated; views to and from the Site, their direction, character and sensitivity to change.

2.8.2 This section summarises and reviews relevant published landscape assessments which contribute to a better understanding of the Site’s and locality’s landscape character.

National Landscape Character Assessment

2.8.3 The landscape of England has been subject to a nationwide landscape character assessment which divides England into National Character Areas (NCAs). The Site lies within NCA 52, **White Peak** (Natural England, 2012). The relevant characteristics of this NCA are broadly described as:

- "The White Peak National Character Area is a raised, undulating limestone plateau deeply incised with steep-sided limestone valleys. It has a strong sense of place arising from the effect of the underlying geology on landform and its influence on natural and manmade landscape features such as caves, crags, drystone walls and traditional buildings.
- The settlement pattern is primarily of small nucleated villages and isolated farmsteads, along with the market towns of Buxton and Bakewell and the spa town of Matlock Bath.
- In terms of ecosystem services, the area is particularly important for the provision of cultural services: sense of place/inspiration, sense of history, recreation, biodiversity and geodiversity.
- The plateau is rich in archaeology, from Neolithic burial mounds and stone circles, such as Minninglow and Arbor Low, to the remains of early lead workings. “

2.8.4 A number of factors are described in the ‘Landscape Change’ section; however because these cover the whole character area they are quite generic. Therefore, following the fieldwork, only the following has been considered relevant to the Site and immediate area:

- “The area of new tree planting in recent years has been small. Between 1999 and 2003 only an area equivalent to 1 per cent of the 1999 total stock was approved for new planting under a Woodland Grant Scheme agreement (28 ha); and

- Two of the largest limestone quarries within the Peak District National Park are located within the White Peak: Tunstead Old Moor and Ballidon. Limestone from the White Peak supplies markets mainly in the Midlands, north-west and east England, and Yorkshire.”

Natural Area Profile

2.8.5 The Site lies within the White Peak Natural Area (No. 30) (Natural England, n.d.). This states:

“The area consists of a gently rolling plateau overlain by acidic wind-blown deposits dissected by steep-sided dales. The Karst scenery is often dramatic and spectacular caves are a notable feature. The pale limestone is characteristic, contrasting strongly with the dark gritstones of the surrounding region. The plateau has been completely cleared of its natural woodland. The resultant heath has since largely disappeared under the plough, and today highly productive meadows and permanent pastures prevail, interspersed with limestone walls and planted shelterbelts. The dales contain the greater part of the area’s considerable biological interest, and are renowned as a meeting point of southern and northern species.

Settlement is sparse on the plateau, with the larger towns to be found along its edges. Nucleated villages and small towns are linked by crest and valley roads, some of Roman origin. The use of combinations of limestone and gritstone as building materials results in the lack of a distinctive building style. The two spa towns of Matlock Bath and Buxton are the largest settlements. Bakewell, within the National Park, provides a focus for tourism and recreation.”

2.8.6 The overarching relevant objectives are listed as:

- “Improve the value of the farmed landscape on the plateau for a wide range of wildlife by promoting environmentally-friendly agriculture on semi-improved and improved grassland.

- Safeguard species-rich meadows, permanent pasture and road verges on the plateau and complement their value by promoting environmentally-sensitive management on surrounding grassland. Enhance poorly-managed examples.

- Develop semi-natural woodland cover on the plateau by extending and linking existing semi-natural woodland and plantations.

- Maximise opportunities for nature conservation in the reclamation of quarries and vein mineral workings.”

Local Landscape Character Assessment

2.8.7 The published applicable local Landscape Character Assessment (Peak District National Park Authority and Countryside, 2009) places the Site in the Limestone Plateau Pastures Landscape Character Type, immediately abutting the Limestone Dales Landscape Character Type (LCT) (see Figure L1).

2.8.8 The assessment outlines the Limestone Plateau Pastures LCT as being:

“An upland pastoral landscape with a regular pattern of straight roads and small to medium sized rectangular fields bounded by limestone walls. Tree cover is mostly limited to occasional tree groups, or small shelter belts, allowing wide views to the surrounding higher ground.”

2.8.9 The characteristics that are relevant to the Site include:

- A rolling upland plateau;
- Pastoral farmland enclosed by limestone walls;
- A regular pattern of small to medium sized rectangular fields;
- Discrete tree groups and belts of trees;
- Medieval granges surrounded by older fields;
- Relict lead mining and quarrying remains; and
- Open views to surrounding higher ground.

2.8.10 The Site abuts the Limestone Dales LCT. The assessment outlines this type as: “A steeply sloping dale landscape with limestone outcrops and extensive tracts of woodland and scrub intermixed with limestone grassland. In some smaller dales this is an intimate, secluded landscape where views are tightly controlled by landform and tree cover, in others the dales are wild and open.”

2.8.11 Although the Site lies mostly within the Limestone Plateau Pastures landscape type, there is strong reasoning for the Limestone Dales LCT being more appropriate to the Site, being “an intimate, secluded and largely semi-natural landscape, where views are often tightly controlled by landform and tree cover.”

2.8.12 Characteristics of the LCT relevant to the Site include:

- Steep sided Limestone Dales;
- Craggy outcrops, cliffs and scree slopes;
- Extensive patches of limestone grassland;
- Interlocking blocks and ancient semi-natural woodland, secondary woodland and scrub;
- Largely unsettled, apart from occasional small mill settlements; and
- Historic mineral working (quarrying, lead mining).

2.8.13 The Landscape Guidelines for the two areas are included in Appendix 3 as extracts from the Landscape Strategy document (Peak District National Park Authority and Countryside, 2009). The key relevant priorities that could be applied to the Site and Proposed Development are summarised in Table 1 Landscape Guidelines

| Priority | Limestone Plateau Pastures LCT | Limestone Dales LCT | |-------------------------------------------------------------------------|-------------------------------|---------------------| | Protect and maintain the historic field pattern | All areas | Not a priority | | Protect and maintain historic drystone walls | All areas | Some areas | | Protect and maintain historic field barns | All areas | Not a priority | | Manage and enhance surviving areas of natural landscapes | Some areas | All areas | | Enhance the diversity of agricultural grassland | Some areas | All areas | | Manage traditional plantation woodlands | Some areas | ‘Generally not appropriate’ | | Manage and enhance woodlands | ‘Generally not appropriate’ | All areas | | Manage and enhance linear tree cover and amenity trees | Some areas | Not a priority | | Manage the network of tracks and footpaths to maximise opportunities to enjoy the landscape | Not a priority | Some areas | | Manage historic mineral landscapes | Some areas | Not a priority | | Create areas of limestone grassland and heath | Not a priority | All areas | | Create new native broadleaved woodland | Not a priority | ‘Generally not appropriate’ | | Develop appropriate landscapes from mineral workings | Some areas | Not a priority |

2.8.14 It is noted that ‘creating new native broadleaved woodland’ is ‘generally inappropriate’ and that ‘developing appropriate landscapes from mineral workings’ is not a priority in the Limestone Dales LCT. There is a distinction between areas that are currently considered to fall within a particular LCT (in the character assessment) and the character type that would best be applied as a match to a modified landscape, as would be the case at Ballidon Quarry, therefore some consideration of these priorities to the specific situation at Ballidon Quarry would need to be applied.

Landscape Characteristics from Fieldwork

2.8.15 Crestwood conducted an assessment of the Site’s and the surrounding area’s landscape characteristics in October 2014. The individual characteristics of the Site and locality were noted, as was the condition of these. The Site’s and locality’s key characteristics and its local context are outlined below.

Landform

2.8.16 The general landform in the vicinity of the Site is variable, as shown by the contours on Figures L1 and L2. The Site also has significant variations of landform (elevation and slope) characteristic of an operational hard rock quarry, with benching and sheer faces present in many of the worked areas.

2.8.17 The main quarry area (West Quarry) has a low point of circa 167mAOD (in the western sector) but, generally, the internal levels are around 180-210mAOD. Woodbarn Quarry has a low point of circa 214mAOD (in the western sector) but is circa 240mAOD in the eastern sector. The periphery of the Site is generally substantially higher than the internal areas, this being a combination of natural and man-made landform. On the southern boundary of the main quarry, the landform is comprised largely of ‘Tip 3’ which is a man-made east-west orientated ridge with a high point of circa 272mAOD, towards the eastern extent. The ridge gently falls to circa 263mAOD along its longitudinal length to the west. The north-facing (internal) and south-facing (external) slopes of the ridge are circa 1:2.5 and 1:3 gradient respectively.

2.8.18 The link between West Quarry and Woodbarn Quarry is via a narrow gap, lower than adjacent levels outside the Site, over which a land bridge runs for circa 35m (east to west). Aside from this, the land lying between the two quarry areas is separated by steep embankments, on both sides of the quarry, of circa 20m height forming a valley/dale landform through which footpath FP6 runs.

2.8.19 The surrounding landscape: The land is generally of higher elevation to the north and lower elevation to the south, although there is significant variation in landform and elevation over the general area with deep dales / valley features running through the area. The Site forms the most northerly point of a widening valley (heading southwards) with occasional hillocks but generally lying at around 170mAOD. This valley is met by valleys running from the northwest (within which Parwich lies), the west-northwest, the northeast and the east, all converging circa 2km south of the Site in a low-lying area circa 1.3km across.

2.8.20 These valleys also provide for stretches of higher land (generally over 190mAOD) between them. Immediately south-southwest of the Site, a rounded ridge extends for circa 1km, with a short valley running immediately north between the Site and Parwich before rising sharply northwards into the plateau area, but still generally rising northwards to the immediate west of the Site, tying into the western boundary of the Site.

2.8.21 To the north of the Site, valleys/dales do extend further becoming gradually less pronounced. Hillocks form localised features, e.g. at Roystone Rocks (at circa 325m AOD, circa 800m to the north) and Minninglow Hill (circa 372mAOD, circa 1.3km to the northeast). Generally, to the north, the land lies at circa 280mAOD in the valleys and otherwise at circa 320mAOD, excepting for high points.

2.8.22 On the eastern boundary of the Site a strong embankment of 30m height or more forms the western part of a pronounced north-south orientated valley / dale feature, which sharply rises again outside the Site from circa 220m, eastwards, reaching over 300mAOD within 0.5km distance to the northeast and rising circa 45m over a distance of circa 130m to the east. A shallower dale runs east-west, transecting the eastern side of this dale. Generally, the land rises to the northeast to circa 360mAOD, in a broad undulating plateau. To the east, the land rises to a highpoint of 298mAOD before sharply falling away into a steep valley before rising again, where the land is much more undulating and generally lower than areas to the north (around 300mAOD).

2.8.23 Immediately southeast of the Site, there is a separate small but steeply-sided previous quarry which breaks up the steep eastern side of the dale feature which would otherwise flow southwards along the boundary of the Site and beyond. The eastern steep slopes turn eastwards circa 400m south of the Site, forming a ‘cove’ landform as it then turns south and westwards, also contributing to a localised promontory of circa 230mAOD, circa 630m south-southeast of the Site boundary.

Settlement, Built Development and Infrastructure

2.8.24 The Site: There are no dwellings within the Site itself, however office buildings and other buildings and plant associated with the quarry are present and would remain unaffected by the Proposed Development. 2.8.25 The surrounding landscape: The area is generally not densely populated. There are two settlements near the Site:

- Ballidon village (190m south of the Site at its nearest point); and
- Parwich village (785m southwest of the Site at its nearest point).

2.8.26 Further afield, there are additional villages at:

- Bradbourne (circa 2.5km to the south-southeast);
- Brassington (circa 2.5km to the east-southeast); and
- Longcliffe (circa 2km to the east)

2.8.27 A number of dwellings, farmsteads and properties are dispersed over the wider area. Those within 1km of the Site include:

- Oldfield Farm (understood to not be inhabited) (to the southeast);
- Ballidon Moor Farm (to the east) – also a camping/caravan site;
- Hoe Grange (to the east);
- Daisy Bank (to the northeast);
- Roystone Grange (to the north);
- Lowmoor Cottages (to the north-northwest);
- Rock View (to the north-northwest);
- Lowmoor Farm (to the north-northwest);
- Twodale Barn (derelict - to the northwest); and
- Hilltop Farm (to the west).

2.8.28 All Saint’s Church lies immediately south of Ballidon and is seemingly in an unsafe condition.

2.8.29 There are no major roads or railways passing through the area. A minor road (no through road) provides access to the Site, through Ballidon, leading from Highway Lane circa 1.5km to the south of the Site. Highway Lane leads to Backhill Lane, which passes to the west of the Site (80m) and beyond, northwards. Monsdale Lane is a very narrow lane that runs from Backhill Lane at a point to the southwest of the Site, westwards to Parwich. Another minor road runs from Backhill Lane, southwestwards from appoint close to the northwest corner of the Site. Other roads traverse through the area without being a significant component of the landscape.

2.8.30 Masts, pylon towers and other similar infrastructure is generally absent from the area, although a two-turbine windfarm (circa 24.5m tall) is present to the north-northwest of Hilltop Farm and a larger four-turbine scheme is visible from the area over 4km to the east at Carsington Pasture. Land-use and Vegetation Cover

2.8.31 The Site: The Site is an operational limestone quarry with large areas of exposed mineral and mineral/overburden tips and stockpiles, with peripheral areas consisting of a combination of limestone grassland, scrub and areas of woodland. Well-established broadleaved woodland is notable by its presence on the outer slopes of Tip 3, along the western boundary of the Site and on high points on the eastern embankment and around the entrance and plant area (in the southeastern corner). These have generally been planted since the quarry became operational. The species mix present is generally not considered to be wholly representative of woodlands characteristic of the area.

2.8.32 The surrounding landscape: Generally, the landscape is pastoral, with a combination of valued semi-natural habitats (represented by Special Area of Conservation (SAC) and SSSI designations, including immediately adjacent to the Site at Ballidon Dale SSSI) and mixed agriculture (including sheep grazing, dairy and improve grassland for cropping). Quarrying is also evident at different scales in the area including old abandoned small sites and larger modern current operations.

2.8.33 Woodland is not a strong component of the landscape in plan area, but, where present, has a marked effect, usually in combination with pronounced landform. Woodland is notable on south-facing slopes to the north and northeast of Parwich, in smaller areas lying between the Site and Ballidon and in parts of steeper valleys present and generally trees are more prevalent in the lower-lying areas (e.g. in hedgerows, which form the prevalent field boundary in these areas). Stone walls and fencing form the prevalent field boundary on higher areas.

2.9 LANDSCAPE VALUE

2.9.1 Landscape Value is one aspect used to help determine the sensitivity of the landscape. Determination of Landscape Value requires a degree of professional judgement, based on the findings in the desk studies and field work. Overall Landscape Value is derived, in this assessment, using criteria on a number of contributing factors (e.g. Scenic Quality), see Tables Ap1 – Ap10 in Methodology and Method of Assessment in Appendix 1.

Value of Landscape Character and Characteristics

2.9.2 A number of relevant aspects are relevant to determination of the Landscape value of the Site and area as described below.

2.9.3 Landscape Protection - No Site lies within a National Park. There are no TPOs affecting trees within or along the Site’s boundaries.

2.9.4 Landscape Condition - The Site overall has been significantly affected by quarrying operations and woodland planting have become well-established elements in the landscape, although do not wholly comprise of characteristic species. The wider area has significant time-continuity with well-preserved features, although some elements are in disrepair (e.g. All Saint’s Church at Ballidon).

2.9.5 Scenic Quality – The Site is generally a detracting feature of the landscape due to areas of man-made and engineered landform, large-scale built elements and lack of vegetation cover. The wider landscape has high scenic quality, as would be expected, with some detracting elements (e.g. unkempt farms and wind turbines). 2.9.6 Rarity – The landscape elements are largely regionally distinctive.

2.9.7 Representativeness – The landscape characteristics are of a good example of its kind.

2.9.8 Conservation Interest - There are numerous ecological, archaeological and geological designations and items of interest adjoining the Site with much less present within the Site.

2.9.9 Tranquillity – Secluded parts of the landscape are fairly ‘wild’ in character, where there is a sense of remoteness or isolation. Human influences are not dominant, with settlement being sparsely distributed. Occasional minor detractors to an experience of tranquillity, but otherwise strong.

2.9.10 Associations – Wikipedia states that Ballidon was the site of an ambush of troops of the Jacobean Rebellion.

2.9.11 Recreational Value – Numerous recreational rights of way pass through the area (none through the Site) within a National Park.

2.9.12 Agricultural Value – Much of the Site is an operational quarry and otherwise of low agricultural value. The general area is Grade 4 with occasional areas of Grade 3.

2.9.13 The factors contributing have been summarised in Table 2.

### Table 2 Landscape Value of the Locality

| Value Level | Protection | Landscape Condition | Scenic Quality | Rarity | Representativeness | Conservation Interests | Tranquillity/Wildness | Associations | Recreational Value | Agricultural Value | |-------------|------------|---------------------|----------------|--------|-------------------|------------------------|----------------------|--------------|-------------------|-------------------| | Very High | ✓ | | | | ✓ | | ✓ | | ✓ | | | High | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | | | | | | Medium | | | | | | | | | | | | Low | | | | | | | | | | ✓ | | Very Low | | | | | | | | | | |

2.9.14 Overall, the characteristics and landscape character of the locality have been assessed as having a **High** landscape value, although with greater value for individual aspects. The Site itself has clearly been heavily revised in relation to natural landforms, habitats etc. forming a transitional aspect of the landscape. The overall value of the Site itself is **Low**, although clearly the Site does lie within the National Park designation, forming a Very High aspect of the Landscape Value in its own right. 3 BASELINE SITUATION - VISUAL ASPECTS

3.1 INTRODUCTION

3.1.1 This section describes the views available to and from the Site, their distribution, character and sensitivity to change. Crestwood has conducted an assessment of the views available to and from the Site by the public through a combination of desk studies and fieldwork.

3.1.2 An examination of the Zone of Theoretical Visibility (ZTV) of the Proposed Development and verification in the field enabled 12 viewpoints to be identified within the study area (see Figure L2).

3.1.3 Predicted visibility of the Proposed Development is normally greater in winter (when trees and hedgerows have no leaves) and the fieldwork was undertaken during autumn and winter, giving a good understanding of the visual screening effects of broadleaved woodland present.

3.2 VISIBILITY

3.2.1 The ZTV calculation was based on a bare earth model using a number of ‘high points’ within various parts of the Site as the ‘targets’ to test for visibility. This largely represents a worst case situation as it doesn’t allow for the screening that may be afforded by interlying topographical elements (e.g. buildings and areas of woodland). The actual areas from which the Proposed Development would be visible are therefore expected to be significantly less than shown on Figure L2. The amount of the Proposed Development visible and the sensitivity of the receptors within the ZTV are not represented by the ZTV and of course the ZTV coincides with large areas of farmland where public access is not provided.

3.2.2 Generally, the Proposed Development is more visible from the south than from the north. Generally, terrain (at the Site and outwith the Site) is the single most influential aspect determining visibility of the Proposed Development.

3.2.3 To the north, the visibility is limited by higher land immediately north of the Site, limiting potential visibility to the highest lying areas.

3.2.4 To the immediate east, the visibility is severely limited within the adjacent valley (dale) feature but as the land rises the areas of theoretical visibility broaden. After circa 0.65km from the Site boundary, the land falls away again, severely limiting opportunities to see the Site, although a higher area of land between Brassington and Longcliffe provides additional opportunities from about 1.75km away from the Site boundary.

3.2.5 To the south, the Site is potentially visible from a large area of land. To the southeast, the land falls away from a distance of circa 1-1.5km distance from the Site boundary, near Bradbourne. To the southwest the visibility is severely restricted from within the Bletch Brook valley (circa 2km to the southwest) and from low-lying land immediately east of Parwich. Visibility is restricted beyond circa 3km to the southwest, near Tissington.

3.2.6 To the west and northwest the visibility is strongly restricted, generally to areas within 1km distance of the Site’s boundary, although visibility is potentially available from further afield to the north-northwest.

3.2.7 Aside from the visual screening effects of the terrain, there are some noteworthy screening effects of woodland also, the effects of which are not demonstrated on the ZTV on Figure L2:

- Along the western edge of the Site, there is a mature broadleaved woodland which strongly restricts views from the west and northwest;
- To the southwest, north of Monsdale Lane, mature woodland provides a screening effect from low-lying areas to the nearby southwest, notably from within Parwich; and
- Woodland present and retained within and immediately outside of the Site to the south – this provides significant screening from lower-lying areas to the south (including Ballidon itself).

### 3.3 VIEWPOINTS

3.3.1 The locations of a representative range of viewpoints where views could be potentially influenced by the Proposed Development are illustrated on Figure L2 and were agreed with the PDNPA (as considered by Garrie Tiedeman (the Authority’s Landscape Architect), David Bent and Andrew Barton) in February 2015. ‘Viewpoints’ have been selected to best represent the variety of views available from public vantage points towards the Proposed Development.

3.3.2 The selected views are labelled by viewpoint ID numbers: Viewpoints 1 to 12, described in Table 3 and illustrated in the Figures.

#### Table 3 Viewpoints (VPs)

| VP No. | Location | Reason for selection | |--------|--------------------------------------------------------------------------|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------| | 1 | On southern Site boundary, on public highway near entrance to the Site and Footpath FP5. | Close-range view potentially affecting a skyline. | | 2 | 150m east of the Site on elevated Access Land. | Close-range view representing views from two areas of Access Land (one Close range, another Medium range). | | 3 | 240m northeast of the Site on elevated Access Land. | Close-range view representing views from area of Access Land and Medium range views beyond from Pennine Bridleway recreational route. | | 4 | 700m east-northeast of the Site from Pennine Bridleway. | Medium-range view from Pennine Bridleway recreational route. | | 5 | 900m northwest of Site on public footpath FP12. | Medium-range view from higher land to the northwest. | | 6 | 600m south of the Site on the Limestone Way Long Distance Bridleway. | Medium-range view from near Ballidon village on long distance recreational route, at a low-lying location with the Site forming the skyline. | 3.3.3 The predicted change in views in relation to the existing situation is described in the assessment section below.

4 LANDSCAPE AND VISUAL ASSESSMENT

4.1 ASSUMPTIONS AND LIMITATIONS

4.1.1 It is assumed that the Site would otherwise continue to be worked and restored as per the consented plans, should permission not be granted, as the ‘do nothing’ scenario.

4.1.2 The assessment is made against a baseline situation assuming that:

- Without the granting of permission, the existing consented mineral extraction operations would cease and restoration be complete by 2040;
- The approved restoration plan for the Existing Quarry Complex is assumed to be Drawing no. NL00852 (Landscape Restoration Masterplan), dated February 2000;
- The proposed works are undertaken in accordance with the Phasing Plans submitted in the planning application with restoration and aftercare initiated as soon as practicably possible; and
- The Proposed Development would be implemented in 6 main operational phases, plus final restoration (for a period of around 2 years) with works to remove Tip 3 taking circa 2 years.

4.1.3 It is assumed that the recommended impact avoidance/mitigation measures are incorporated. This includes use of best practice landscaping construction, planting and ongoing management/maintenance techniques to promote rapid establishment, prevent rapid deterioration and increase amenity, biodiversity and other functions of the residual landscape. It is also assumed that any required specific restoration details can be produced for approval (e.g. as a requirement by planning condition), based on the masterplan proposals provided as part of this application, and implemented in full.

4.1.4 The fieldwork was undertaken during daylight hours during early autumn and winter 2014, providing a good understanding of the worst-case seasonal effects on views. No access was available to private locations to ascertain actual views from these specific locations.

4.1.5 The information used for the assessment of cumulative effects was made using the information available for other developments in the locality at the time of the assessment.

4.2 PREDICTED POTENTIAL IMPACTS

4.2.1 Taking the assumptions in Section 4.1 into account, the predicted potential visual and landscape impacts are expected to primarily relate to the tip and mineral extraction operations in the Tip 3 area, although changes to the restoration proposals and changes to the visibility of existing quarry have the potential to create different visual and landscape impacts to those created by the approved scheme of working.

4.2.2 The Proposed Development also provides a good opportunity to reduce a number of existing adverse visual and landscape (in particular) effects and provide improvements over the existing approved situation; notably in relation to landform and restored habitats.

4.2.3 The potential sources of impact are identified as outlined in Table 4 and, without consideration of being addressed, have the potential to adversely affect visual amenity and landscape character both from within and from outside the Site.

| Source of Potential Impact | |-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------| | Change of land cover and landscape elements (during operational and restoration period), most noticeably from removal of semi-mature woodland. | | Increased visibility of the existing and proposed quarry operations and associated plant, principally through the reduction in height of much of Tip 3. | | Temporary landform changes during mineral extraction (exposed rock faces and benches) and from tips and mounds. | | Permanent landform changes upon restoration – mostly likely to be positive through appropriate landform design. | | Soil handling operations and associated machine movements. |

4.3 IMPACT AVOIDANCE AND MITIGATION MEASURES

4.3.1 Alternative directions of working, depths of working and restoration scheme configurations were all considered when seeking the most effective scheme for the Proposed Development. Limitations were primarily found to relate to operational constraints of a partially worked quarry, potential visibility of operations and quarry faces, operational and safety considerations, and provision of suitable and available restoration material. 4.3.2 The Proposed Development has had the following impact avoidance and reduction measures incorporated to mitigate adverse landscape and visual effects:

- Phasing Operations to work and restore the more visible areas early on, allowing lower, less visible areas to be worked later, ensuring that the highest and south-facing parts of the operational quarry are restored as early as possible, coupled with the reduction in height of Tip 3.

- Providing a landform which is more characteristic of the Limestone Dales (to which the Site more appropriately corresponds, rather than the Limestone Plateau Pastures LCT within which it currently lies) and removing prominent unnatural landforms (e.g. Tip 3, as seen from the east) that would otherwise remain.

- Maintaining as much existing mature/semi-mature tree/woodland vegetation where appropriate and possible to do so, to minimise adverse effects on the skyline and contribute to screening from lower lying positions.

- Restoring areas and providing aftercare progressively, at the earliest stage and managing thereafter to promote quick establishment and good growth to provide:

  - Screening of certain features (e.g. unavoidable sharp changes in slope (faces/benches));
  - Enhanced, more characteristic landscape elements and habitat corridors; and
  - Removal of ‘bare ground’ from the landscape as soon as possible, reducing the operational ‘land-take’.

4.4 EFFECTS ON LANDSCAPE CHARACTERISTICS AND CHARACTER

4.4.1 Effects on the landscape can apply at an individual level (e.g. to specific landscape elements or characteristics) and at the landscape character level. Effects on Landscape Characteristics can be direct (e.g. removing woodland) or indirect (e.g. by changing visual openness that may be contributing to an overall landscape character away from the source of the effect) and may have an overall effect on landscape character.

4.4.2 Important or Significant changes to landscape character occur when the relative level of contribution of the existing key characteristics changes (either through reduction/increase or removal/addition) such that the landscape would be defined or classified differently at a given geographical scale. The assessment of this is informed by considering the interaction of landscape sensitivity and magnitude of different effects.

4.4.3 Landscape Value (see Section 2.9) is High in the immediate vicinity of the Site and the Site is of Low Landscape Value (albeit being within the National Park – a Very High level individual Landscape Value aspect).

4.4.4 Based on Table Ap12 the Landscape Susceptibility of the Site to the Proposed Development is considered to be Medium, i.e. Landscape characteristics have a degree of susceptibility to change; but there is good scope to replace these elements without adversely affecting the character (and improving it for the Very Long term). There is distinguishable landscape structure, but with the Site, against the baseline, there are no significant features worthy of conservation; and some are detracting features. 4.4.5 Based on Table Ap12, the Landscape Susceptibility of the Locality to the Proposed Development is considered to be **High**, i.e. Landscape characteristics are susceptible to change and fairly difficult to mitigate without affecting the existing character. The area is typically of recognisable landscape structure with features worthy of conservation, detracted in part by the presence of the existing quarry.

4.4.6 The determination of Landscape Sensitivity is guided by Table Ap13, reproduced below:

| Land. Value | Very Low | Low | Medium | High | Very High | |-------------|----------|-----|--------|------|-----------| | Very Low | Very Low | Very Low | Low | Low or Medium | Medium | | Low | Very Low | Low | Low or Medium | Medium | Medium or High | | Medium | Low | Low or Medium | Medium | Medium or High | High | | High | Low or Medium | Medium | Medium or High | High | Very High | | Very High | Medium | Medium or High | High | Very High | Very High |

4.4.7 The Landscape Sensitivity of the locality to the Proposed Development is considered to be **High**. The landscape sensitivity of the Site to the Proposed Development is considered to be **Low or Medium**.

4.4.8 The determination of magnitude of landscape effect is guided by Table Ap13, as reproduced below.

| Magnitude of Landscape Effect | Landscape Criteria | |------------------------------|---------------------| | Very Large | Typically, large scale changes and/or numerous changes to important landscape characteristics | | Large | Typically, large scale changes to some landscape characteristics, or a high number of medium scale changes to the landscape characteristics | | Medium | Typically, some medium scale changes to some landscape characteristics | | Small | Typically, a low number of medium scale changes to landscape characteristics, or a number of small scale changes to landscape characteristics | | Very Small | Typically, occasional, small scale changes to unimportant landscape characteristics |

4.4.9 The magnitude of change is considered in the context of an existing operational quarry, i.e. the Proposed Development comprises changes to the working and restoration scheme and is not a wholly new development or an extension into ‘virgin’ ground outside the planning boundary. The phased nature of the Proposed Development is such that there is a progressive change from operational areas to restored areas. The effects have been considered, below, during the Operational Period and then after operations and restoration has been completed (i.e. during the subsequent (residual) period).

**Operational Period**

4.4.10 The Proposed Development alters the way the Site is worked but does not extend the life or the operational land-take, at any moment in time, of the consented development. Certain landscape elements will change from the consented scheme, notably the landform and (temporarily) the land cover at Tip 3.

4.4.11 The change to this landform in the Proposed Development is of note, due to the reduction in levels, the change in slope angle and the overall form that would be created by its partial removal. The reduction in height of the slope will be coupled with a reduction in semi-mature (circa 20-year old) planted woodland (to be partially replanted). This will reduce the apparent backdrop and skyline to existing landscapes being appreciated to the south; these could be considered beneficial aspects, reducing the apparent amount of woodland, keeping a lower, but similar wooded style of skyline and removing some uncharacteristic landforms from view, especially apparent during the winter. The visual containment afforded by woodland/landform in combination would reduce slightly, being more in keeping with that of the adjacent areas, being transitional between the limestone upland plateau and limestone dales.

4.4.12 The level of tranquillity afforded at the Site and immediate areas will reduce marginally during the Operational Period when working in the area of Tip 3. The Proposed Development (operations) will be a partially characteristic element of the existing landscape (due to the existing quarry) but creating a different adverse effect (altered areas of quarrying, temporary landform change and removal of woodland). Once completed, the landform changes will be considered to be beneficial overall, with adverse effects decreasing as new restored landscape elements establish and develop - present for a Very Long term duration. Overall, on balance, the magnitude of adverse effect of the Proposed Development on the landscape character of the immediate locality is, during the operational period, considered to generally be Very Small but rising to Small when experienced, indirectly from specific areas (notably higher land to the southeast of Ballidon, within the Village Farmlands and Shale Ridges LCT).

Restoration and Aftercare (Residual) Period

4.4.13 The landform will be permanently altered, creating a new landform over the approved situation, in the landscape, which would be appreciable from a small number of close and medium-range locations. The changes will be largely beneficial due to the revised restoration proposals responding to the landscape guidelines for the character areas, responding to views afforded from key viewpoints (e.g. strategic woodland planting to mitigate residual quarry faces/benches) and generally producing slopes more in keeping with the locality, sat between limestone uplands plateau and limestone dales.

4.4.14 There will be a reduction in the number and lengths of quarry faces/benches retained upon restoration, replaced with slopes generally of no steeper gradient than are naturally found immediately adjacent to the Site, thus partially reflecting its landscape character. The revised shape of the water body, whilst covering approximately the same area, is less natural, with straighter quarry face edges present at the water’s edge, although neither would be apparent from outside the Site.

4.4.15 The Tip 3 area will be replanted with broadleaved woodland, using species more in keeping with those found naturally in the landscape (see restoration proposals), maintaining the wooded boundary between the lower valleys and the transition to limestone dales and limestone uplands plateau (and the change in character to the restored quarry). The main quarry area (West Quarry) will change to contain a higher proportion of calcareous grassland, for sheep grazing, with a reduction in woodland, but with areas of woodland and scrub retained for structure, to help integrate quarry faces/benches into the landscape and to provide habitat ‘stepping stones’ and continuity to those outside of the Site. Incongruous elements on the approved restoration scheme (e.g. large areas of willow carr and general preponderance of woodland) are not included in the Proposed Development.

4.4.16 Overall, on balance, the magnitude of beneficial effect of the Proposed Development on the landscape character of the immediate locality, upon restoration, is considered to be Small - Medium.

4.4.17 The derivation of levels of importance of effect generally follows a pattern by which the relationship between sensitivity and magnitude contributes to the level of effect as shown diagrammatically below. On balance, in overall planning terms, Important of Significant effects may not necessarily be considered unacceptable. The principles set out in the diagram below and Table Ap14 (see Appendix 1) have been used to guide the assessment on significance of direct and indirect effects on the landscape.

4.4.18 The direct and indirect (overall adverse) effect on landscape characteristics during the Operational Period are considered to generally be of Minor-Moderate Significance, within and outwith the Site, having some effect on the landscape characteristics and landscape character without exceeding the landscape capacity threshold. Key characteristics would be retained and not affected to a Significant or notable degree.

4.4.19 For a Medium-term duration an adverse landscape effect of a Moderate level of Significance will be experienced from a specific area of the Village Farmlands and Shale Ridges LCT, due to the relative proximity and contribution that the presence of the woodland on the Tip 3 area makes to the character context, when experienced from specific elevated locations to the southeast of the Site, where, even though quarry operations would have exerted an influence in the past, the influence of the existing and consented quarry on this area is currently very small (see Viewpoint 7).

4.4.20 Generally, upon establishment of the restoration, there will be an enhancement with regards to the landscape characteristics within the Site overall and as experienced in the wider landscape context. The reconfigured landform, land-use and habitats are elements that are more characteristic in the natural area and so will be considered to have a positive effect. The positive effects will strengthen with time as the landscape elements mature.

4.4.21 The (overall) beneficial residual effect on the landscape characteristics at the Site is considered to be of Minor-Moderate significance overall for the Site itself and of Moderate significance in the wider landscape context, where there will be wider improvements experienced in landscape character terms, within a National Park area, and beyond. Again, there would be some effect on the landscape characteristics and landscape character without exceeding the landscape capacity threshold. Key characteristics would be retained and enhanced but not affected to a Significant or notable degree. Table 5 Summary of Assessment of Significance of Landscape Effects

| | Site Only (Direct effects) | Locality (Indirect effects) | |--------------------------------|-----------------------------|-----------------------------| | Landscape Sensitivity | Low - Medium | High | | Operational Period Magnitude of overall effect | Small Adverse | Generally Very Small Adverse overall magnitude | | Operational Period – Significance of Landscape Effects | Minor-Moderate (of adverse effect) | Generally Minor-Moderate, where experienced Specific effect experienced from part of Village Farmlands and Shale Ridges (SE of Ballidon) – Moderate (of adverse effect) | | Residual Period Magnitude of overall effect | Small-Medium Beneficial | Small Beneficial | | Residual Period – Significance of Landscape Effects | Minor-Moderate (of beneficial effect) | Moderate (of beneficial effect) |

Cumulative Landscape Effects

4.4.22 The local landscape has historically been quarried with some (more distant)sites still being active and including many smaller areas which have been restored or have become self-established and naturalised to some degree. The Proposed Development does not extend the life, geographical extent overall or land-take at any moment of time beyond that currently consented. Consequently, no Significant cumulative landscape effects are anticipated.

4.5 EFFECTS ON VISUAL AMENITY

4.5.1 The presentation of the assessment of visual effects has focused on representative viewpoints which represent a range of sensitive locations with the potential to be affected to a significant level.

4.5.2 Twelve Viewpoints have been selected to best represent the range of sensitive viewpoint locations and main effects within the ZTV, and are illustrated using photographs and photomontages in Figures L3 to L16.

4.5.3 Close range views are taken to be from viewpoints within 0.5km, Medium-range views from between 0.5 and 1.5km and Long-range views from over 1.5km from the Site. The criteria for Sensitivity of visual receptors is provided in Table Ap15, as reproduced below: | Visual Sensitivity | Value and Susceptibility to Change Criteria | Typical Receptor Types/Locations | |-------------------|--------------------------------------------|---------------------------------| | Very High | Nationally well recognised and advertised location for high visual amenity **value**\
Prominent location or vista with high visual amenity **value** that is recognised in published sources.\
Very high **susceptibility to change** as a very high level of attention focussed on the landscape and particular views. | Nationally promoted Long Distance Footpath users.\
Protected View recognised in planning policy designation.\
Visitors to nationally advertised attractions where visual amenity is very important to their enjoyment.\
Private views from primary living space regularly used in daylight hours where the focus is on a landscape of recognised very high value. | | High | Well-known area recognised regionally for high landscape **value**.\
Open areas of recognised public access where primary enjoyment is of the views of the landscape.\
High **susceptibility to change** as a high level of attention focussed on the landscape and particular views. | Users of local advertised circular, recreational or well-used footpath routes and open access land where primary enjoyment is from the landscape and visual amenity.\
Road and rail users on routes through landscapes recognised for their high scenic value.\
Private views from areas of a property curtilage occasionally used in daylight hours, e.g. access drives, where the focus is on the landscape beyond private curtilage. | | Medium | Locations afford views of some **value**, but visual amenity not well recognised beyond locality.\
Moderate **susceptibility to change** as a moderate level of attention focussed on the landscape and particular views. | General recognised public access routes (road and rail routes) with some landscape interest.\
Public houses, restaurants etc. where views would include some focus on the wider landscape.\
Views from recreational sport areas which may involve some incidental appreciation of views of the wider landscape, e.g. golf or fishing.\
Private views from residential properties from rooms not normally occupied in waking or daylight hours, e.g. bedrooms. | | Low | Viewpoint context and location is of lesser **value** than similar views from nearby visual receptors that may be more accessible.\
Low **susceptibility to change** as low level of attention focussed on the landscape and particular views. | Views from recreational sport areas which does not involve or depend upon appreciation of views of the landscape, e.g. football, rugby, speedway.\
Minor road routes where passengers would have limited focus on a landscape of no recognised value.\
People at their places of work where the main focus is not on the surrounding landscape context. | | Very Low | Viewpoint context is such that views have a very low **value**.\
Expectations of visual amenity are very low.\
Activity at viewpoint is incidental to the view. | People at their place of work where there the type of activity has no relationship to the surrounding landscape context. |

4.5.4 The representative viewpoint locations are shown on Figure L2 and listed in Table 6 together with an indication of the receptor groups represented, their distance from the Site (range) and the visual sensitivity of these receptors.

### Table 6 Summary Visual Sensitivity of Receptors at Viewpoints (VPs)

| Viewpoint No. | Location Description | Main Receptors Represented | Range | Sensitivity | |---------------|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|---------------------------------------------|---------|-------------| | 1 | On southern Site boundary, on public highway near entrance to the Site and Footpath FPS. | Footpath users | Close | Medium | | 2 | 150m east of the Site on elevated Access Land. | Access Land users | Close | Medium | | 3 | 240m northeast of the Site on elevated Access Land. | Access Land users | Close | Medium | | 4 | 700m east-northeast of the Site from Pennine Bridleway. | Long Distance Footpath / Bridleway users | Medium | Very High | | 5 | 900m northwest of Site on public footpath FP12. | Footpath users | Medium | Medium-High | | 6 | 600m south of the Site on the Limestone Way Long Distance Bridleway. | Long Distance Footpath / Bridleway users | Medium | Very High | | 7 | 630m south-southeast of the Site on the Limestone Way Long Distance Bridleway. | Long Distance Footpath / Bridleway users | Medium | Very High | | 8 | 800m southwest of the Site on footpath FP9 at edge of Parwich village. | Road users | Medium | Very High | | 9 | 1.47km southwest of the Site on elevated section of Limestone Way Long Distance Bridleway. | Long Distance Footpath / Bridleway users | Medium | Very High | | 10 | 1.52km south of the Site on local road. | Road users | Long | Medium | | 11 | 2.59km south-southwest on elevated section of Limestone Way Long Distance Bridleway. | Long Distance Footpath / Bridleway users | Long | Very High | | 12 | 2.31km south of the Site from footpath FP18, near Bradbourne village (outside National Park) | Footpath users | Long | Medium |

Note: All distances are from the location of where the photograph was taken to the Site, not from the façade of the nearest dwelling house for example.

4.5.5 The assessment of visual effects uses professional judgement to ascertain levels of Significance through levels of contribution of sensitivity (as described above), magnitude and nature of effect. The Magnitude of effect is provided in Table Ap16, as reproduced for convenience below.

### Magnitude of Visual Effect

| Magnitude of Visual Effect | Visual Criteria | |---------------------------|-----------------| | Very Large | Where the proposals become the only dominant feature in the view and to which all other elements become subordinate. Typically involves direct views at close range over a wide horizontal and vertical extent. | | Large | Where the proposals would form a significant and immediately apparent element of the scene and would affect the overall impression of the view. Typically involves direct or oblique views at close range with notable changes over the horizontal and vertical extent. | | Medium | Where proposals would form a visible and recognisable new development but where it is not intrusive within the overall view. Typically involves direct or oblique views at medium range with a moderate horizontal and/or vertical extent of the view affected. | | Small | Where proposals constitute only a minor component of the wider view, which the casual observer could miss or where awareness does not affect the overall quality of the scene. Typically involves an oblique view at medium or long range or a direct view at long range with a small horizontal/vertical extent of the view affected. | | Very Small | Where only a very small part of the development is discernible or that it is at such a distance that the effects are scarcely appreciated. |

#### 4.5.6

The derivation of levels of effect (indicating their importance or significance) generally follows a pattern by which the relationship between sensitivity and magnitude contributes to the level of effect as shown diagrammatically below. This process is applied to the selected representative viewpoints. On balance, in overall planning terms, Important or Significant effects may not necessarily be considered unacceptable.

#### Assessment from Viewpoint 1

**Individual Visual Effects on Viewpoint 1**

#### 4.5.7

Viewpoint 1 is on the southern boundary of the Site on a public highway and adjacent to public footpath FP5; see Figure L3. The view represents those obtained by highways and footpath users (the main represented visual receptors), i.e. provides transient views, within the National Park, immediately adjacent to the existing quarry entrance. These visual receptors are of **Medium** sensitivity.

#### 4.5.8

The view takes in close range views of the quarry entrance, associated buildings and vehicle parking space as well as areas of semi-mature broadleaved woodland, within and immediately adjacent to the Site. There are no long distance views beyond the existing quarry and woodland, the viewpoint being relatively low-lying to the Tip 3 area, on which woodland forms much of the skyline backdrop to the view.

4.5.9 The only noticeable changes brought by the Proposed Development in this view is the removal of the existing skyline, through reduction in height of the southern bund and associated removal of woodland in those areas. The interlying woodland would screen the actual ground works from view, the only noticeable difference being the change in the skyline. The skyline would remain as being comprised by retained woodland during the Operational Period. The magnitude of change in the view would be Very Small and the nature of the effect would be adverse, reducing the visible woodland in the view. The adverse individual visual effect, during the Operational Period is of Minor significance for footpath users.

4.5.10 Upon restoration, once established, the woodland be reinstated such that there would be no discernible changes in view from that which currently forms the consented baseline (approved restoration).

Combined Cumulative Visual Effects on Viewpoint 1

4.5.11 There are no cumulative visual effects on Viewpoint 1.

Assessment from Viewpoint 2

Individual Visual Effects on Viewpoint 2

4.5.12 Viewpoint 2 is located 150m east of the Site, on elevated Access Land; see Figure L4. The view represents those obtained by users of two areas of Access Land to the east of the Site (one Close range, another Medium range) and potentially from a farm property/buildings/residence lying between the areas of Access Land (not able to be accessed for the assessment). The views in towards the Site rely on being on high-lying areas (more elevated areas) of land, and from close-range would rely on users actively seeking out the highest points to gain views. These visual receptors are of Medium sensitivity.

4.5.13 The existing view is dominated by the existing quarry, including the bare mineral, processing plant and buildings, mounds of mineral and conveyors etc. Woodbarn Quarry is also partially visible (largely quarry faces) in the wider view. In the foreground, the land falls away steeply such that it is essentially overlooked, but comprises calcareous grassland scrub. The backdrop to the view comprises of a mixture of woodland and grassland fields. The Site does not breach the skyline from this location. Tip 3 is viewed ‘side-on’ from this location and takes the form of a sharp-edged ridge, with steep slopes and is partially wooded and partially grassed. The Tip is a detracting element of the view.

4.5.14 The Proposed Development would be largely visible in the view from this location, as would be the consented development. During the Operational Period, the main changes to the consented development relate to the area of Tip 3. The Proposed Development would see the sharp ridge feature reduced in height, with a small apparent amount of woodland also removed, the retained slope being much less prominent and the quarry faces moving back (southwards, further left into the view) – a beneficial effect once completed. The retained landform immediately beyond the main processing building would screen much of the working on the western side of the Tip 3 area. The northwestern, upper slopes would be restored early in the scheme, reducing the amount of open faces visible from this location and replacing with calcareous grassland in the view – a beneficial effect once in place. Few discernible changes from the consented situation would be evident in Woodbarn Quarry from this location during the Operational Period. The skyline would remain unchanged during the Operational Period. The magnitude of any adverse change in the view, from the consented situation during the Operational Period would be Small. The adverse individual visual effect, during the Operational Period is of Minor-Moderate significance.

4.5.15 Upon restoration, once established, the changes in the view would be provide permanent improvements over the consented situation, including:

- Substantially fewer visible restoration faces in both quarry areas;
- A less visually prominent landform at Tip 3;
- A visible landform more in keeping with those outwith the Site but within the view; and
- Land-use/habitats more congruous with adjacent areas, with increased grassland and less apparent woodland.

These effects would be evident for a Very Long term duration and would be of Medium magnitude over the consented restoration. The beneficial individual visual effect, during the Restoration Period is of Moderate significance.

Combined Cumulative Visual Effects on Viewpoint 2

4.5.16 There are no cumulative visual effects on Viewpoint 2.

Assessment from Viewpoint 3

Individual Visual Effects on Viewpoint 3

4.5.17 Viewpoint 3 is located 240m northeast of the Site on elevated Access Land; see Figure L5. It is representative of Close-range views from an area of Access Land and of the direction of view, from Medium range, beyond from the Pennine Bridleway National Trail, e.g. near Daisy Bank (see ‘Other Viewpoints’ below. The views in towards the Site from the Access Land rely on being on high-lying areas (more elevated areas) of land and would rely on users actively seeking out the highest points to gain views. These visual receptors are of Medium sensitivity.

4.5.18 The existing view is, similarly to Viewpoint 2, dominated by the existing quarry, but primarily with the bare mineral, mounds of mineral and quarry faces etc. forming the key components of the view. Woodbarn Quarry is also partially visible (largely upper quarry faces), with this being nearer to the viewpoint than the main quarry area (West Quarry), but being substantially screened by interlying land. Again, similarly to Viewpoint 2, in the foreground, the land falls away steeply such that it is essentially overlooked, but comprises calcareous grassland scrub. The backdrop to the view again comprises of a mixture of woodland and grassland fields, although the backdrop does extend a substantial distance compared to that seen from Viewpoint 2. The Site does not breach the skyline from this location but Tip 3 is a prominent and detracting element of the view.

4.5.19 Land lying on the eastern part of the northern boundary of the main West Quarry area (south of the eastern part of the Woodbarn Quarry area) is currently being raised and restored, in line with the consented scheme and this will continue, forming Phase 1 of the Proposed Development, such that the levels will raise over 10m and help to screen much of the internal area of the West Quarry part of the Site. The removal of the majority of Tip 3, as part of the Proposed Development, will form the biggest change over the consented scheme. The operations to undertake this will be visible for Short-term before much of the working below the tip would take place, largely out of view. Woodland planting, undertaken as part of the restoration, on the interlying restored ridge landform, will maximise screening potential.

4.5.20 The Proposed Development would see the Tip 3 sharp ridge feature reduced in height, allowing more distant views over the backdrop landscape, with a very small apparent amount of woodland also removed. The retained slope will be much less prominent and the quarry faces largely out of view – beneficial effects, once completed. The remaining mineral working would be largely as per the consented situation and the skyline would remain unchanged. The magnitude of any adverse change in the view, from the consented situation during the Operational Period would be Small-Medium. The adverse individual visual effect, during the Operational Period is of Moderate significance.

4.5.21 Upon restoration, once established, the changes in the view would provide permanent improvements over the consented situation, including fewer visible restoration faces in both quarry areas and a less visually prominent landform in the Tip 3 area. These effects would be evident for a Very Long term duration and would be of Small magnitude over the consented restoration. The beneficial individual visual effect, during the Restoration Period is of Minor - Moderate significance.

Combined Cumulative Visual Effects on Viewpoint 3

4.5.22 There are no cumulative visual effects on Viewpoint 3.

Assessment from Viewpoint 4

Individual Visual Effects on Viewpoint 4

4.5.23 Viewpoint 4 is located 700m east-northeast of the Site from Pennine Bridleway; see Figure L6. It is representative of medium-range views from the Pennine Bridleway recreational route within the National Park; views that are very restricted in number. These visual receptors are of Very High sensitivity.

4.5.24 The viewpoint provides an intermediate direction of view to Viewpoints 2 and 3, but from a greater distance. The existing view is panoramic, taking in a large area of countryside, with pasture fields forming the foreground, the Ballidon Quarry part of the Site forming a large proportion of the mid-ground and dales, ridges and plateau areas with a combination of trees and fields forming the backdrop. Woodbarn Quarry is virtually screened from view at this location. The Site does not breach the skyline from this location and Tip 3 is markedly less prominent in the view from this location compared to that seen from Viewpoints 2 and 3. The increased distance from the Site reduces the resolvable detail and therefore higher contrast elements are more easily distinguished. At the Site, this relates to existing bare ground and mineral and the sharp changes in slope (e.g. quarry faces/benches) in contrast to vegetated areas, which blend into the wider scene unobtrusively.

4.5.25 The Proposed Development would see Tip 3 reduced in height, exposing additional mineral in the view for a Medium-term duration, viewed obliquely, limiting the lateral extent of the additional area in the view. The early restoration of the northwest corner of the Ballidon Quarry part of the Site will reduce some of the exposed mineral and steep slopes that would otherwise be present in the view as part of the consented development. The remaining mineral working would be largely as per the consented situation and the skyline would remain unchanged. The magnitude of any adverse change in the view, from the consented situation during the Operational Period would be Small. The adverse individual visual effect, during the Operational Period, given the Very High sensitivity of the visual receptor, is of Moderate-Major significance.

4.5.26 Upon restoration, once established, the changes in the view would provide permanent improvements over the consented situation, including fewer visible restoration faces in both quarry areas and a more characteristic landform at Tip 3 and in the northwestern/northern part of West Quarry. These effects would be evident for a Very Long term duration and would be of Very Small magnitude over the consented restoration. The beneficial individual visual effects, given the Very High sensitivity of the visual receptor, during the Restoration Period, is of Moderate significance.

4.5.27 Overall, given the limited duration of adverse effects, the very low number of available viewpoints represented at this location and the permanent improvements to the view brought about by the restoration scheme changes, the effects are not considered to be Significant.

Combined Cumulative Visual Effects on Viewpoint 4

4.5.28 There are no cumulative visual effects on Viewpoint 4.

Assessment from Viewpoint 5

Individual Visual Effects on Viewpoint 5

4.5.29 Viewpoint 5 is located 900m northwest of Site on public footpath FP12; see Figure L7. It is representative of a restricted number of Medium-range views from higher land to the northwest (footpath users, on linked routes, within the National Park). These visual receptors are of Medium-High sensitivity.

4.5.30 The existing view comprises open countryside, largely grassland fields, with occasional woodland, over a plateau area with visible shallow dales in the near view, becoming more undulating into the distance. The wind farm at Carsington Pastures is also visible in the distance. Much of the Site is screened from view, although small areas of quarry face, the tops of the main processing building and the highest parts of Tip 3 are able to be made out, without being readily noticeable. Woodland, just outside the western edge of the Site, screens most of the Tip 3 area.

4.5.31 The Proposed Development would see the visible part of Tip 3 removed from view. Farmland beyond would take its place during the Operational Period. Upon restoration, some woodland may be visible. The magnitude of change in the view, from the consented situation during the Operational Period and Restoration Period would be Very Small and the effects largely neutral. The visual effects on this viewpoint are therefore of Minor significance.

Combined Cumulative Visual Effects on Viewpoint 5

4.5.32 There are no cumulative visual effects on Viewpoint 5. Assessment from Viewpoint 6

Individual Visual Effects on Viewpoint 6

4.5.33 Viewpoint 6 is located 600m south of the Site on the Limestone Way Long Distance Bridleway; see Figure L8. It is representative of Medium-range views from near Ballidon village on a long distance recreational route, at a low-lying location, with the Site forming the skyline. These visual receptors are of Very High sensitivity. Residents at Ballidon village are likely to have more restricted views towards the Site, but will experience similar views accessing their properties via the public highway.

4.5.34 The view takes in ridge and furrow farmland in the foreground, parts of Ballidon village in the mid-ground, together with narrow belts of woodland and farmland forming the sides to a dale in the background. The background is relatively near to the viewpoint (no distant backdrop is visible) with landform being the main constraint. This raised landform is partly natural, leading up to the plateau area beyond and with rocky limestone outcrops visible also in the right hand side of the view, and partly of man-made landform: Tip 3. This is largely obscured by planted woodland which is now well-established. Tip 3 forms much of the skyline, softened slightly by the outline of the woodland.

4.5.35 The Proposed Development would see Tip 3 reduced in height, retaining interlying woodland in place. This, in combination with the residual landform in the Tip 3 area, post working, would prevent views beyond into the Site; see Figure L9. The works involved to remove the tip will initially involve removal of the woodland and subsequent lowering of the landform. Vehicles and a changing landform will be visible for a Short-term duration. The magnitude of any adverse change in the view, from the consented situation during the Operational Period would be Small-Medium. The adverse individual visual effect, during the Operational Period, given the Very High sensitivity of the recreational footpath visual receptor, is of Moderate-Major significance.

4.5.36 Upon restoration, once established, the changes over the consented situation would be of Very Small magnitude, lowering the landform slightly, but with new woodland gradually creating a very similar effect to that consented. These effects are at worst neutral, but potentially beneficial, creating a slightly less visually enclosed effect. The individual visual effect, given the Very High sensitivity of the visual receptor, during the Restoration Period, is of Minor significance.

4.5.37 Overall, given the limited duration of adverse effects and the low number of affected viewpoints represented at this location, the effects are not considered to be Significant.

Combined Cumulative Visual Effects on Viewpoint 6

4.5.38 There are no cumulative visual effects on Viewpoint 6.

Assessment from Viewpoint 7

Individual Visual Effects on Viewpoint 7

4.5.39 Viewpoint 7 is located 630m south-southeast of the Site on the Limestone Way Long Distance Bridleway; see Figure L10. It is representative of Medium-range views from circa 250m stretch of a long distance recreational route, from an elevated position to south-southeast. The viewpoint is at a similar elevation to Tip 3 and views towards the Site would be predominantly taken in by users heading west (eastbound users having to stop and turn around to take in the view). The represented visual receptors are of Very High sensitivity.

4.5.40 The view takes in a rolling rural landform comprising of a variety of elements including farmland, woodland, rocky outcrops, farm buildings and stored materials (detracting elements) and houses at Ballidon and includes Tip 3, which lies very close to the skyline. The wider view to the southwest takes in more distant views of the landscape, but towards the Site and beyond, the backdrop is largely limited to the nearest slopes rising up to the plateau area. The main quarry area is currently out of view. The 2 wind turbines at Hilltop Farm are visible on the skyline.

4.5.41 The Proposed Development would see Tip 3 reduced in height, removing woodland from the view, introducing bare mineral and earth moving operations into a small portion of the view for a Short-term duration. The limited duration of the operations is the key mitigation from this viewpoint. The replacement in the view, for Tip 3, from this location, will be the restored slopes in the northwest corner of the Site and previously restored and vegetated benches on the western edge of West Quarry. The retained part of the Southern bund will provide some retained screening. The magnitude of any adverse change in the view, from the consented situation during the Operational Period would be Medium. The adverse individual visual effect, during the Operational Period, given the Very High sensitivity of the visual receptor and limited duration and length of path affected, is of Moderate-Major significance.

4.5.42 Upon restoration, once established, the changes over the consented situation would be of Very Small magnitude, lowering the landform slightly, but with new woodland gradually creating a very similar effect to that consented. The effect will be adverse, however, as the landform visible beyond will take in a small section of quarry faces. The individual visual effect, given the Very High sensitivity of the visual receptor, during the Restoration Period, is of Moderate significance.

4.5.43 Overall, adverse effects on this specific viewpoint, a short stretch of a recreational path largely for westbound users, are borderline Significant. The adverse effects are Significant for Phase 2 only. Thereafter the visual effects are not considered to be Significant.

Combined Cumulative Visual Effects on Viewpoint 7

4.5.44 There are no cumulative visual effects on Viewpoint 7.

Assessment from Viewpoint 8

Individual Visual Effects on Viewpoint 8

4.5.45 Viewpoint 8 is located 800m southwest of the Site on footpath FP9 at edge of Parwich village; see Figure L11. It is representative of Medium-range views from the junction between a minor road (Monsdale Lane) and a public footpath near edge of residential area. The visual receptors include residents, users of the highway and users of the public footpath, and nearby Limestone Way Long Distance Bridleway in the National Park. The long distance bridleway users are of Very High sensitivity.

4.5.46 The view takes in a rural scene comprising a dale with a wooded valley side to the north (left) and grassland with scrub and trees with stone wall field boundaries in the remaining parts of the view. Trees largely form the skyline, including a very small part which is contributed by trees on the Tip 3 area. No other part of the Site is visible.

4.5.47 The Proposed Development would see only the smallest part of woodland within the Site removed from view, replaced by sky. The magnitude of change in the view, from the consented situation during the Operational Period and Restoration Period would be Very Small and the effects neutral. The visual effects on this viewpoint are therefore of Negligible significance.

Combined Cumulative Visual Effects on Viewpoint 8

4.5.48 There are no cumulative visual effects on Viewpoint 8.

Assessment from Viewpoint 9

Individual Visual Effects on Viewpoint 9

4.5.49 Viewpoint 9 is located 1.47km southwest of the Site on elevated section of Limestone Way Long Distance Bridleway; see Figure L12. It is representative of Medium-range view from long distance recreational route with pleasant views over Parwich. The represented visual receptors are of Very High sensitivity.

4.5.50 The view creates a highly scenic effect with a diverse and balanced set of pleasing elements in the view, including the characteristic buildings of Parwich, broadleaved woodland, rocky outcrops, woodland copse hilltop focal point, grassed fields with tree and shrub boundary vegetation in the fore and mid ground and more ‘wild’ plateau grassland beyond. The Site is essentially hidden from view and woodland on Tip 3 is the only contributing element to the scene.

4.5.51 The Proposed Development would see only the smallest part of woodland within the Site removed from view, replaced by grassland on the limestone plateau beyond. The magnitude of change in the view, from the consented situation during the Operational Period and Restoration Period would be Very Small and the effects neutral. The visual effects on this viewpoint are therefore of Negligible significance.

Combined Cumulative Visual Effects on Viewpoint 9

4.5.52 There are no cumulative visual effects on Viewpoint 9.

Assessment from Viewpoint 10

Individual Visual Effects on Viewpoint 10

4.5.53 Viewpoint 10 is located 1.52km south of the Site on local road; see Figure L13. It is representative of Long-range views from the broad valley to the south of the Site, within the National Park, from roads and dispersed residences, with the Site forming the skyline. These visual receptors are of Medium (road users) and High (Residents) sensitivity.

4.5.54 The view takes in farmland in the foreground, with interlying trees present along field boundaries, interrupting the view in the background of higher land (woodland and grassland) partially comprising Tip 3. Some minor detracting elements in the view exist (e.g. telegraph poles/lines) and a small part of the quarry is visible (including the main processing plant building).

4.5.55 The Proposed Development would see Tip 3 reduced in height with machinery and regarding works likely to be visible but not noticeably evident, replacing the skyline with a marginally lower wooded skyline. No additional views into the quarry would be gained. Upon restoration, woodland would re-establish and reinforce this skyline. The changes over the consented situation would be of Very Small magnitude, lowering the landform slightly, but with new woodland gradually creating a very similar effect to that consented. These effects are at worst neutral, but potentially beneficial, creating a slightly less visually enclosed effect. The individual visual effects are of Negligible significance.

Combined Cumulative Visual Effects on Viewpoint 10

4.5.56 There are no cumulative visual effects on Viewpoint 10.

Assessment from Viewpoint 11

Individual Visual Effects on Viewpoint 11

4.5.57 Viewpoint 11 is located 2.59km south-southwest on elevated section of Limestone Way Long Distance Bridleway; see Figure L14. It is representative of Long-range views from a long distance recreational route in the National Park, from an elevated position to the south-southwest. The visual receptors are of Very High sensitivity.

4.5.58 The view is panoramic and far-reaching, taking in large areas of undulating countryside, with valleys and plateau areas visible. Occasional wooded highpoints form focal points (e.g. Minninglow Hill). The scene is one of a mixture of grassland and woodland with numerous scattered trees and occasional areas of settlement visible, without being prominent. The Site forms a very small, inconspicuous part of the scene, being almost completely hidden from view, except for the wooded Southern Tip Area.

4.5.59 The Proposed Development would see Tip 3 marginally reduced in height producing a marginally lower wooded area in that part of the view. No additional views into the quarry would be gained and operations to lower the tip area would not be readily discernible from this distance. Upon restoration, woodland would re-establish, but with minimal effect over the consented situation. The changes over the consented situation would be of Very Small magnitude, essentially neutral in nature and the individual visual effects are of Minor significance for the visual receptors of Very High sensitivity at this location.

Combined Cumulative Visual Effects on Viewpoint 11

4.5.60 There are no cumulative visual effects on Viewpoint 11.

Assessment from Viewpoint 12

Individual Visual Effects on Viewpoint 12

4.5.61 Viewpoint 12 is located 2.31km south of the Site from footpath FP18, near Bradbourne village (outside National Park); see Figure L15. It is representative of Long-range views from a public footpath, from an elevated position to the south also representing views from a small number of residences facing the Site at Bradbourne. The visual receptors are of Medium (footpath users) and High (residents) sensitivity.

4.5.62 The view covers a wide area and the Site forms a small proportion of the view and lies close to the horizon. The view takes in areas of agricultural land, farmsteads and settlements, with interspersed areas of woodland, some forming skyline features. Occasional detracting elements in the view include telegraph/electricity poles and overhead wires. Existing quarry benches are readily visible in the scene (from Woodbarn Quarry), and Tip 3 is also visible, without being an obvious element in the view.

4.5.63 The Proposed Development would see Tip 3 marginally reduced in height producing a marginally lower wooded area in that part of the view. The actual operations would not be readily visible due to the distance of the viewpoint from the works, but the exposed material may increase the contrast with adjacent vegetation, making the area slightly more evident in the view for a Short-term duration. This part of the view would be replaced by restored grassland slopes on the northern and northwestern boundary of the Ballidon Quarry part of the Site (see Figure L16) undertaken during Phase 2. No additional views into the operational parts of the quarry would be gained.

4.5.64 Upon restoration, woodland would re-establish in the Tip 3 area but with minimal effect over the consented situation. Bench planting in Woodbarn Quarry would be undertaken, as per the consented situation to better integrate these into the view. The changes over the consented situation would be of Small magnitude and adverse in nature during Phase 1. Thereafter, effects would be neutral. The visual effects are of Minor-Moderate significance for the footpath users and of Moderate significance for residents.

Combined Cumulative Visual Effects on Viewpoint 12

4.5.65 There are no cumulative visual effects on Viewpoint 12.

4.6 EFFECTS ON OTHER VISUAL RECEPTORS

4.6.1 Views gained from other locations on the Pennine Bridleway are very restricted in number due to the banks, stone walls and route through areas of cutting. Views can be sought at locations such as Daisy Bank, where stone walls have gaps, and are represented by the similar view from Viewpoint 3 and partially by Viewpoint 4 (also from the Pennine Bridleway, circa 400m to the southeast). The views from the Pennine Bridleway are longer distance (Medium-range, whereas View point 3 is from a Close-range) but the Pennine Bridleway is from a slightly more elevated location. Consequently, a slightly smaller proportion of the view is affected by the Proposed Development from this location. Similar types of effects would be experienced from this location as to Viewpoint 3 and the assessment commentary for this and Viewpoint 4 apply to this location also. Moderate-Major significance of visual effects could be expected during the Operational Period and overall, given the limited duration of adverse effects, the very low number of available viewpoints and the permanent improvements to the view brought about by the restoration scheme changes, the effects are not considered to be Significant from this location.

4.6.2 Other Long-range views may be afforded from specific locations outside of the National Park to the east. Given the distance to the Site and the ability to discern specific operations taking place, the lateral views to Tip 3 and Short-term duration of the effects during Phase 1 the significance of any adverse effects (which are likely to generally be neutral) from these locations is expected to be Minor. 4.7 SEQUENTIAL CUMULATIVE IMPACTS

4.7.1 Given the distance to other quarries in the vicinity (likely to be 3km plus along routes) and the large choice of routes available to footpath and road users, no significant sequential cumulative visual impacts are anticipated for main routes through the area.

5 SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS

5.1 DESIGN AND ASSESSMENT

5.1.1 The design of the Proposed Development has undergone a series of changes to refine the proposals, with the aim of avoiding and minimising potentially significant landscape and visual effects and has been informed by local character assessments, biodiversity targets and local planning policy.

5.1.2 This has resulted in an iterative design and assessment process, using Chartered Landscape Architects following the latest best practice guidance, which looked at a variety of aspects, including extent of mineral extraction, phased working and restoration (considering the existing quarry constraints also) and available visual screening, restoration and afteruse design options.

5.1.3 The assessment aspect took into consideration the sensitivities of the landscape characteristics (within the Site and outwith the Site) and specifically of the National Park location and its landscape character and of visual receptors and their likely response to any changes in visual amenity.

5.2 LANDSCAPE AND VISUAL EFFECTS

5.2.1 Adverse effects on landscape and visual receptors have been acknowledged during the assessment process.

5.2.2 During the Operational Period, the adverse effects on visual amenity are limited to a maximum level of Moderate-Major with many others of a much lower level. A number of beneficial visual effects will result over the consented scheme upon establishment of the restoration scheme, one of which will be of Moderate significance (Viewpoint 4). There will be an adverse visual effect on Viewpoint 7 upon restoration (of Moderate significance). None of these effects is considered to be Significant overall, although one viewpoint (Viewpoint 7) will experience a Significant effect for a Short-term duration during the Operational Period (Phase 2).

5.2.3 During the Operational Period, the adverse effects on the landscape resource are generally limited to a Minor-Moderate level, with a Moderate indirect landscape effect on the Village Farmlands and Shale Ridges LCT experienced from the vicinity of Viewpoint 7, to the southeast of the Site, during Phase 2. None of these effects is considered to be Significant.

5.2.4 Upon establishment of restoration, beneficial effects on landscape character will be experienced within and outwith the Site; these are of Minor-Moderate and Moderate significance respectively.

5.3 CONCLUSION

5.3.1 The Proposed Development (the Operational Period and the residual restoration) has been designed to meet the requirements of the specific policies relating to effects on the landscape and visual amenity in Section 2.1. Adverse and beneficial effects will result from the Proposed Development, with the numerous beneficial landscape and visual effects being experienced permanently and phased in progressively and the adverse effects being temporary in absolute terms. The creation of substantial areas of calcareous grassland (in lieu of incongruous wet woodland bench planting) complies with a key targets for the Limestone Dales LCT, where new native woodland is ‘generally not appropriate’. The Short-term duration of adverse effects could be considered, in overall terms, to at least be balanced out, and probably outweighed, by the permanent landscape and visual improvements that could be brought about by the Proposed Development to the Site and the surrounding area, in the National Park. REFERENCES:

- Christine Tudor (Natural England), 2014. *An Approach to Landscape Character Assessment*. s.l.:s.n.
- Countryside Agency and Scottish Natural Heritage, April 2002. *Landscape Character Assessment, Guidance for England and Scotland*. s.l.:s.n.
- Defra, 2010. *English National Parks and the Broads UK Government Vision and Circular 2010*. s.l.:s.n.
- Department for Communities and Local Government, 2012. *National Planning Policy Framework*. s.l.:s.n.
- Department for Communities and Local Government, n.d. *Guidance - Natural Environment: Landscape*. [Online] Available at: http://planningguidance.planningportal.gov.uk/blog/guidance/natural-environment/landscape/ [Accessed 16 February 2015].
- Landscape Institute, 2011. *Photography and Photomontage in Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment (Advice Note 01/11)*. s.l.:s.n.
- MAFF, 1988. *Agricultural Land Classification of England and Wales - Revised Guidelines and Criteria for Grading the Quality of Agricultural Land*. s.l.:s.n.
- Natural England, 2012. *National Character Area Profile 67*, s.l.: s.n.
- Natural England, n.d. *Natural Areas - Midlands Plateau*. [Online] Available at: http://www.naturalareas.naturalengland.org.uk/Science/natural/NA_Details.asp?NA_ID=43&S=&R=5 [Accessed Oct 2014].
- Peak District National Park Authority and Countryside, 2009. *Peak District National Park Landscape Strategy and Action Plan 2009 – 2019 (Final Report)*. s.l.:s.n.
- Peak District National Park Authority, 2003. *Minerals Strategic Action Plan*. s.l.:s.n.
- Peak District National Park Authority, Adopted 2011. *Peak District National Park Local Development Framework - Core Strategy Development Plan Document*. s.l.:s.n.
- Peak District National Park Authority, n.d. *Peak District National Park Management Plan*. [Online] Available at: http://www.peakdistrict.gov.uk/microsites/nmpm [Accessed 16 February 2015].
- Peak District National Park, n.d. *Local Plan 2001*. [Online] Available at: http://www.peakdistrict.gov.uk/publications/local-plan-2001 [Accessed 16 February 2015].
- The Landscape Institute, 2013. *Guidelines for Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment (Third Edition)*. In: s.l.:s.n. ABBREVIATIONS / ACRONYMS:

For the avoidance of confusion, abbreviations used have the meanings given below:

| Abbreviation | Meaning | |--------------|----------------------------------------------| | AGL | Above Ground Level | | AGLV | Area of Great Landscape Value | | AOD | Above Ordnance Datum | | AONB | Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty | | AVR | Accurate Visual Representation | | c. | Circa | | CoP | Code of Practice | | CWS | County Wildlife Site | | DEM | Digital Elevation Model | | DSM | Digital Surface Model | | DTM | Digital Terrain Model | | EA | Environment Agency | | FOV | Field of View | | GIS | Geographical Information System | | LCA | Landscape Character Area | | LCT | Landscape Character Type | | LNR | Local Nature Reserve | | LPA | Local Planning Authority | | LVA | Landscape and Visual Appraisal | | LVIA | Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment | | LWS | Local Wildlife Site | | MPA | Mineral Planning Authority | | NCA | National Character Area | | NGR | National Grid Reference | | NNR | National Nature Reserve | | NPPF | National Planning Policy Framework | | NPPG | National Planning Policy Guidance | | OS | Ordnance Survey | | PDL | Previously Developed Land | | PDNPA | Peak District National Park Authority | | POS | Public Open Space | | RCA | Regional Character Area | | RIGS | Regionally Important Geological Site | | SAC | Special Conservation Area | | SAM | Scheduled Ancient Monument | | SINC | Site of Importance for Nature Conservation | | SLINC | Site of Local Importance for Nature Conservation | | SSSI | Site of Special Scientific Interest | | TPO | Tree Preservation Order | | VEM | Visual Envelope Map | | ZVI | Zone of Visual Influence | | ZTV | Zone of Theoretical Visibility | | ZPV | Zone of Primary Visibility | | ZSV | Zone of Secondary Visibility | GLOSSARY:

For the avoidance of confusion, the terms used in this report follow the definitions given below:

**Landscape** An area, as perceived by people (in relation to past experiences, education etc.), whose character is the result of the action and interaction of natural and/or human factors. Landscape may comprise areas of rural land, urban fringe, urban land (townscape), coastal land, the sea (seascape) etc.

**Townscape** The character and composition of the built environment including the buildings and the relationships between them, the different types of urban open space, including green spaces, and the relationship between buildings and open spaces.

**Seascape** Landscapes with views of the coast or seas, and coasts and adjacent marine environments with cultural, historical and archaeological links with each other.

**Landscape Element** A component part of the landscape (e.g. landform, roads, hedges, woods).

**Landscape Feature** A prominent eye-catching element (e.g. wooded hilltop or church spire).

**Landscape Characteristics** Combinations of elements and experiential characteristics (e.g. noise, smell) that make a particular contribution to a Landscape Character Type.

**Landscape Receptor** Defined aspects of the landscape that have the potential to be affected by a Proposed Development.

**Landscape Scene** The landscape characteristics discernible from a given viewpoint/location. The visual aspects of this can be illustrated in a static two-dimensional manner in photographs to represent a sample view of the landscape scene.

**Landscape Character** The distinct recognisable pattern of elements that occurs consistently in a particular landscape and how people perceive this, creating a particular sense of place.

**Landscape Character Types** LCTs refer to multiple areas of the same character.

**Landscape Character Areas** LCAs refer to specific geographical locations of a particular character type. These can be described and categorised at different scales depending on criteria used.

**Landscape Condition** The strength of expression of landscape character and intactness of constituent characteristic elements from visual, functional, ecological and cultural perspectives. This is not the same as Scenic Beauty.

**Landscape Capacity** The threshold at which change to the landscape resource results in significant change to its landscape character. This is directly related to landscape sensitivity.

**Landscape Susceptibility** The ability of a defined landscape receptor (e.g. landscape characteristics) to accommodate the specific Proposed Development without undue negative consequences.

**Landscape Value** The desirability of landscape characteristics (including scenic beauty, tranquillity, wildness, cultural associations, conservation interests etc.) and the acceptability of their loss to different stakeholders (i.e. valued for different reasons by different people and on different scales, e.g. local, national).

**Landscape Sensitivity** The level of stability, robustness and resilience of landscape receptors and their ability to be replicated based on their quality, condition and value. Landscape sensitivity is based on a combination of judgements on landscape susceptibility and landscape value.

**Landscape Receptor** Landscape element, characteristic or character that would potentially receive/experience an effect.

**Visual Receptor** Individuals, special interest groups, a community or population that would potentially experience an effect on their view. | **Scenic Beauty / Scenic Quality** | Subjective value attributed to the emotional response of an individual to a landscape scene, which, although heavily influenced by intrinsic condition, is also conditioned by an individual's perception (memories, associations, cultural influences and preference). | | **Visual Amenity** | The subjective value attributed to the degree of pleasure gained from what is seen in a given view (quality of view). | | **Visual Sensitivity** | The estimated level of susceptibility or likely viewer’s response to a change in view from a given viewpoint in relation to its context, the existing visual amenity, the activity and expectations of the viewer and the number of viewers affected. | | **Tranquillity** | Subjective experience from being at a location that provides individuals with the space and conditions to relax, achieve mental balance and a sense of distance from stress. Tranquil areas are often associated with quiet, remote (or appearing remote), natural, non-developed (non-built) and non-busy areas. | | **Impacts and Effects** | ‘Impact’ refers to an action being taken and an ‘effect’ is the change resulting from that action. The process of assessing effects arising from development is commonly referred to as ‘impact assessment’. ‘Impacts’ and ‘effects’ are often used interchangeably. Directive 2011/92/EU (The assessment of the effects of certain public and private projects on the environment) requires member states to assess the likely significant effects of a project (e.g. development) on the environment before determining whether consent should be given. This requirement has been transposed via Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) Regulations. This LVIA refers to significance (or level) of effects in the wider sense, to mean positive (beneficial) or negative (adverse) environmental effects that are important (material) considerations in the decision-making process, whether assessed as part of an EIA or otherwise. This is directly related to set criteria and terminology as set out within the assessment process. Significant effects may, on balance with other considerations, be acceptable or unacceptable in overall planning terms. | | **Site Visibility** | The areas within which the subject site can be seen, the amount of site visible and the numbers able to see the subject site. | | **Zone of Theoretical Visibility (ZTV)** | Also known as a Zone of Visual Influence (ZVI), Visual Envelope Map (VEM) and Viewshed. This represents the area over which a development can theoretically be seen, based on a DTM. The ZTV usually presents a ‘bare ground’ scenario - that is, a landscape without screening structures or vegetation. This information is usually presented upon a map base. | | **Zone of Primary Visibility (ZPV)** | The Zone of Primary Visibility (ZPV) represents the geographical area from which the Proposed Development would represent a notable new element in the view and therefore where significant landscape and/or visual effects are likely to occur without further consideration (e.g. secondary mitigation). | | **Zone of Secondary Visibility (ZSV)** | A Zone of Secondary Visibility (ZSV) can be used to represent the geographical area from which the Proposed Development may be visible without being a notable new element in the view or where views are partly restricted or are from greater distances, and therefore where significant landscape and/or visual effects are unlikely to occur after Primary Mitigation measures have been taken into account. | | **Digital Terrain Model (DTM)** | Also known as a digital elevation model (DEM). This is a digital representation of the ground surface (landform or terrain) created by linking co-ordinate points of surveyed elevation values to create a 3D ‘model’ which computers can use to undertake calculations relating to slope angles, point visibility, flood risk etc. | | **Digital Surface Model (DSM)** | As per a DTM except that it relates to the levels of surfaces above the ground where present (e.g. vegetation or roof levels). | | **Field of View (FOV)** | Term used to describe the height and width of a view as represented by an image. These constitute the horizontal field of view and vertical field of view and are expressed as angles in degrees. Humans have an extreme horizontal field of view of about 200°, but only 6-10° will be in focus at any one time. Thus a viewer moves their eyes and head around to see a view over a wide area. | | Enhancement | A measure resulting in a beneficial effect which is not related to any adverse effect. | | Mitigation | A measure to avoid, reduce or remedy adverse effects (principally significant effects) caused by the proposed development. These may be defined at Primary and Secondary Mitigation measures. | | Primary (1°) Mitigation | Mitigation measures which have either been developed through the iterative design process and which have become integrated or embedded into the project design, or are commitments to utilise best practice techniques to avoid or minimise adverse effects (e.g. industry best practice guidance on construction). | | Secondary (2°) Mitigation | Mitigation measures that have been designed to address any adverse effects remaining after Primary Mitigation measures have been incorporated into the project design (i.e. residual adverse effects). | APPENDICES:

APPENDIX 1 METHODOLOGY AND METHOD OF ASSESSMENT APPENDIX 2 FIGURES APPENDIX 3 LANDSCAPE GUIDELINES

LIST OF APPENDIX TABLES:

TABLE AP 1 VALUE IN RELATION TO LANDSCAPE PROTECTION TABLE AP 2 VALUE IN RELATION TO LANDSCAPE CONDITION TABLE AP 3 VALUE IN RELATION TO SCENIC QUALITY TABLE AP 4 VALUE IN RELATION TO RARITY TABLE AP 5 VALUE IN RELATION TO REPRESENTATIVENESS TABLE AP 6 VALUE IN RELATION TO CONSERVATION INTEREST TABLE AP 7 VALUE IN RELATION TO TRANQUILLITY/WILDNESS TABLE AP 8 VALUE IN RELATION TO ASSOCIATIONS TABLE AP 9 RECREATION VALUE TABLE AP 10 AGRICULTURAL VALUE TABLE AP 11 OVERALL LANDSCAPE VALUE (EXAMPLE ONLY) TABLE AP 12 SUSCEPTIBILITY TO CHANGE OF LANDSCAPE RECEPTORS TABLE AP 13 LANDSCAPE SENSITIVITY TABLE AP 14 MAGNITUDE OF LANDSCAPE EFFECTS TABLE AP 15 SIGNIFICANCE OF LANDSCAPE EFFECTS TABLE AP 16 SENSITIVITY OF VISUAL RECEPTORS TABLE AP 17 MAGNITUDE OF VISUAL EFFECTS TABLE AP 18 SIGNIFICANCE OF VISUAL EFFECTS TABLE AP 19 CATEGORISATION OF CUMULATIVE EFFECTS Appendix 1 METHODOLOGY AND METHOD OF ASSESSMENT

Ap 1.1 GENERAL

Ap 1.1.1 This assessment has been undertaken in accordance with:

- The Guidelines for Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment (third edition), published April 2013 by the Landscape Institute and Institute of Environmental Management and Assessment;
- Landscape Character Assessment, Guidance for England and Scotland, published April 2002 by the Countryside Agency and Scottish Natural Heritage;
- Photography and Photomontage in Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment (Advice Note 01/11), published February 2011 by the Landscape Institute; and
- An Approach to Landscape Character Assessment (Christine Tudor (Natural England), 2014).

Ap 1.1.2 The assessment considers two separate (but inter-related) components:

- Effects on the Landscape; and
- Effects on Views.

Ap 1.1.3 As the two components are inter-related, the assessment of one has been undertaken alongside the other and this resultant document referred to as the Landscape and Visual Appraisal (LVA) or Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment (LVIA).

Ap 1.1.4 The assessment process aims to:

1. Establish the baseline situation;
2. Identify potential sources of direct and indirect impact;
3. Identify impact receptors and estimate their sensitivity;
4. Estimate the magnitude and nature of effects;
5. Appraise alternatives and indicate additional/alternative measures of impact avoidance, mitigation or offset, where possible;
6. Re-estimate the magnitude and nature of effects; and
7. Provide an assessment of the significance of the mitigated effects and relate this back to the relevant Landscape Planning Policies.

Ap 1.1.5 In the presentation of this assessment, item 5 in the list above has been summarised only, in the interests of conciseness, i.e. the assessment of alternativeness is not presented in detail within this report.

Ap 1.1.6 The assessment includes a combination of objective and subjective judgements. Subjective judgements are avoided where possible, focussing on what would be experienced rather than making assumptions regarding people’s expected responses. Ap 1.1.7 The assessment allows for worst-case scenarios, although indications are given as to the effects under ‘normal conditions’ also, e.g. seasonal effects of vegetation.

Ap 1.1.8 No specific assessment has been made, in this report, of impacts on the historic landscape character of the area or any cultural heritage receptors such as Scheduled Monuments and Listed Buildings.

Ap 1.1.9 The detailed assessment process and terminology used is specific to this assessment. This is further described below with the intended meaning of some specific terms explained in the glossary provided.

Ap 1.2 BASELINE SITUATION – GENERAL

Ap 1.2.1 Both the landscape and visual assessment components have been undertaken against a set of Baseline Conditions (the Baseline Situation), which has been established during the first stage of the assessment process, using a combination of desk study and field survey work. This provides a transparent basis from which assessment results have been determined and against which professional judgements have been made.

Ap 1.2.2 The baseline used may be different for the landscape and visual impact assessment of specific development proposals assessed:

- In isolation (i.e. where development is assessed on its own merits); and
- In combination with other developments creating a similar effect (i.e. the cumulative landscape and visual effects of a number of similar developments).

Ap 1.2.3 The baseline used has been detailed in the assessment assumptions, in the relevant section.

Ap 1.2.4 The study of the Baseline Situation includes a review of available document sources (e.g. published Landscape Character Assessments, landscape policy guidance), Ordnance Survey map data, historical maps, aerial photographs and the undertaking of a field survey.

Ap 1.2.5 During the field survey, the principal landscape elements and features were recorded which, depending on their prominence and importance, contribute to the overall character of the area. Typical elements may include landform, land use, watercourses, vegetation, built development/infrastructure and areas of public access.

Ap 1.2.6 A check of the likely visibility of the development proposals is also made during the field survey, with a photographic record made and visual receptor information noted.

Ap 1.3 BASELINE SITUATION – LANDSCAPE ASPECTS

Ap 1.3.1 A description of the landscape characteristics is provided in relation to the Site itself and the surrounding landscape. Further analysis of the existing landscape is also made to determine aspects such as Landscape Condition, Landscape Value (non-monetary) and site visibility (see glossary) to assist in the determination of landscape sensitivity. Historic Landscape Aspects

Ap 1.3.2 Research of historic aspects of the landscape in this document is limited to sites designated for historic-related reasons and changes observed between older maps and aerial photographs where relevant.

Baseline Situation – Visual Aspects

Zones of Theoretical Visibility (ZTVs)

Ap 1.3.3 The visual baseline includes examination of the visibility of the existing Site and the proposals using ZTV computer analyses, cross-section analyses and the use of photographic records from field studies, limited to an area within which there lies the potential for significant visual effects to occur. The main study area for this assessment covers an area up to a distance of circa 3 kilometres from the Site boundary.

Ap 1.3.4 The ZTV examinations have been determined using a combination of computer-aided ground modelling software and 3D Ordnance Survey data (allowing for boundary screening, curvature of the earth and atmospheric refraction) and field observations. The ZTV does not take into account other topographical features such as built development or vegetation cover, e.g. trees and hedgerows.

Viewpoints

Ap 1.3.5 During the field study, which was undertaken in October and December 2014, a photographic record was made to represent the range of potential views towards the Site, from available viewpoints within the study area. These locations are mapped, the visual receptor types recorded and viewpoint landscape context described. No access to private properties has been obtained during the field study. Estimates of visibility have been made using computer software modelling where required.

Ap 1.3.6 The photographs have been taken using a Canon EOS 5D SLR camera using a 50mm focal length (35mm format equivalent) lens.

Ap 1.3.7 Viewpoints may be categorised as follows:

- **Representative Viewpoints** – selected to represent the experience of different types of visual receptor, where larger numbers of viewpoints cannot all be included individually and where the effects are unlikely to differ;

- **Specific Viewpoints** – selected because they are key and sometimes promoted viewpoints within the landscape; and

- **Illustrative Viewpoints** – Selected specifically to demonstrate a particular effect or specific aspect (e.g. screening).

Ap 1.3.8 From the record of identified visual receptors and general visibility viewpoints have been determined and used in the assessment process. These have been included to reflect the locations which represent a range of available views and which are typically representative of views of visual receptors most likely to incur significant visual effects within the ZTV.

Ap 1.3.9 The photographs used to illustrate the assessment have been ‘stitched’ together using digital imaging software to provide a ‘panorama image’, thus providing a visual context to the focus of the centre photograph. The photographs have been corrected for lens distortion and to correct changes of scale across the photograph and a cylindrical projection used to ensure consistency of scale across the panorama, vertically and horizontally when viewed on printed paper.

Ap 1.4 ASSESSMENT OF LANDSCAPE EFFECTS

General

Ap 1.4.1 Landscape receptors can be described in a number of ways. Landscape effects derive from changes to landscape receptors which include the physical landscape (landscape elements), which may give rise to change in how the landscape is experienced. These individual contributors to landscape character are termed ‘landscape characteristics’. Areas with similar landscape characteristics can be described as having a certain landscape character or of being a particular Landscape Character Type (LCT). Where these are specific to a geographical area they are referred to as Landscape Character Areas (LCAs). These can be described and categorised at different scales depending on criteria used.

Ap 1.4.2 The context of a location, in its wider setting, can influence the experience of the landscape and therefore its landscape character. Therefore, changes in the landscape character at one location can potentially affect the context of another landscape character type. In certain situations this can have an effect on the setting of valued or important landscape elements (e.g. registered parks and gardens).

Ap 1.4.3 The landscape impact assessment describes the likely nature and scale of changes to individual landscape elements and characteristics and the consequential effect on the landscape character in relation to the development site itself and on the wider landscape. Due to the inherently dynamic nature of the landscape, it can be accepted that change arising from a development may not necessarily be significant.

Landscape Sensitivity

Ap 1.4.4 Landscape sensitivity can vary for landscape characteristics and landscape character. The specific sensitivity of landscape character to change is referred to as landscape character sensitivity.

Ap 1.4.5 Landscape (character) sensitivity relates to the combination of:

- The (non-monetary) value of the landscape receptors, which is established at the baseline stage; and
- The susceptibility of the landscape receptors to change in relation to the Proposed Development. Landscape Value

Ap 1.4.6 Value of landscape receptors is affected by a number of factors:

- **Landscape Protection** - through designation or strength of landscape policies/strategy aims associated with a landscape or its constituent parts;

- **Landscape Condition** - Subjective value attributed to the emotional response of an individual to a landscape scene, which, although heavily influenced by intrinsic condition, is also conditioned by an individual’s perception (memories, associations, cultural influences and preference);

- **Scenic Quality** - Subjective value attributed to the emotional response of an individual to a landscape scene, which, although heavily influenced by intrinsic condition, is also conditioned by an individual’s perception (memories, associations, cultural influences and preference);

- **Rarity** - The presence of rare elements or features in the landscape or the presence of a rare Landscape Character Type;

- **Representativeness** - Whether the landscape contains a particular character and/or features or elements which are considered particularly important values;

- **Conservation Interests** - The presence of features of wildlife, earth science or archaeological or historical and cultural interest where this adds value to the landscape;

- **Wildness/tranquillity** - The presence of wild (or relatively wild) character in the landscape (e.g. rivers, sea) which makes a particular contribution to sense of place; closely associated with tranquillity (i.e. the subjective experience from being at a location that provides individuals with the space and conditions to relax, achieve mental balance and a sense of distance from stress);

- **Associations** - With particular people, (e.g. artists, writers) or events in history that contribute to perceptions of the natural beauty of the area;

- **Recreation Value** - Evidence that the landscape is valued for recreational activity where experience of the landscape is important; and

- **Agricultural Value** – Evidence that the landscape is valued for its agricultural use, referencing known site surveys, farmer knowledge and resources such as the ALC of England and Wales (MAFF, 1988).

Landscape Value: Geographical level of landscape protection

Ap 1.4.7 International designations (e.g. World Heritage Sites) would be classed as the highest level under this category, whereas the lowest would be where there are no designations, where there never have been any designations and where the landscape policy or strategy advocates the need for substantial change to improve the landscape. Relative ratings for this aspect are indicated in Table Ap 1: Table Ap 1 Value in relation to Landscape Protection

| Value Level | Relevant Criteria | |-------------|-------------------| | Very High | Statutory, international or national landscape designation and/or policies/strategies which reflect this level of protection to change. | | High | Current, non-statutory, local landscape designation based on up-to-date assessment methods and criteria and/or policies/strategies which reflect this level of protection to change. | | Medium | Previous local landscape designations which are no longer in place but which reflect some previous value to society and/or reflected in some restrictions to change in local policies/strategies. | | Low | Landscape never been designated although some relevant general local policies in place to prevent harmful development from detracting from the landscape. | | Very Low | Landscape never been designated and active policies/strategies in place to promote improvements to a poorly-valued landscape. |

Landscape Value: Landscape Condition

Ap 1.4.8 Relative ratings for this aspect are indicated in Table Ap 2:

Table Ap 2 Value in relation to Landscape Condition

| Value Level | Relevant Criteria | |-------------|-------------------| | Very High | Consistently, characteristics are in very good condition and present in a unified manner. Landscape and cultural elements are all intact and in a strong functional and visual condition. In rural landscapes, diverse range of large and continuous habitats of very high importance. | | High | Characteristics in good condition but not in unified manner: interrupted character. Landscape and cultural elements are mostly in a strong functional and visual condition. In rural landscapes, the semi-natural habitats are fairly large, closely clustered and frequent allowing relatively easy cross-interaction. | | Medium | Generally, characteristics in good condition but sometimes masked or disrupted by incongruous elements: small level of deterioration evident. Visual and functional condition of characteristic landscape and cultural elements generally (but not necessarily entirely) reasonable; some evidence of decline. In rural landscapes, the semi-natural habitats are in relatively discrete but medium-sized units with some opportunity for cross-interaction. | | Low | Weak or degraded landscape character with a small number of characteristics present and at least as many incongruous elements present. Visual and functional condition of landscape and cultural elements generally poor. In rural landscapes, the semi-natural habitats are of limited area and patchy, providing limited opportunity for cross-interaction. | | Very Low | Heavily degraded landscape character dominated by incongruous elements in poor condition. Land has been subject to extensive alteration of distinctive landscape components removing its historical and cultural significance. In rural areas, there are only fragments of semi-natural vegetation present, too isolated to allow natural repopulation. | Landscape Value: Scenic Quality

Ap 1.4.9 Relative ratings for this aspect are indicated in Table Ap 3:

| Value Level | Relevant Criteria | |-------------|-------------------| | Very High | No detracting characteristics. Presence of diversity and balance of form, colour, texture and contrast with interesting or captivating scenery in an aesthetically pleasing and uncommon way. | | High | Occasional detracting characteristics. Presence of some diversity and balance of form, colour, texture and contrast with interesting scenery, in an aesthetically pleasing way. | | Medium | Some detracting characteristics balancing a number of aesthetically pleasing aspects, but fairly common over the locality. | | Low | A number of detracting characteristics, with little variation or colour, texture, form or contrast generally outweighing aesthetically pleasing positive contributing characteristics to the scene. | | Very Low | Few, if any, positive characteristics present within the scene with no balance or diversity, little interest and very low aesthetic appeal. |

Landscape Value: Rarity

Ap 1.4.10 Relative ratings for this aspect are indicated in Table Ap 4:

| Value Level | Relevant Criteria | |-------------|-------------------| | Very High | Internationally or nationally distinctive, rare landscape characteristics contributing to individual character. | | High | Regionally distinctive, rare landscape characteristics contributing to individual character. | | Medium | Locally distinctive landscape characteristics contributing to local character. | | Low | Occasional individual locally distinctive landscape characteristics. | | Very Low | Very commonly found, indistinctive landscape characteristics present. | Landscape Value: Representativeness

Ap 1.4.11 Relative ratings for this aspect are indicated in Table Ap 5:

| Value Level | Relevant Criteria | |-------------|-------------------| | Very High | Landscape characteristics / character of an exceptional example of its kind. | | High | Landscape characteristics / character of an good example of its kind. | | Medium | Occasionally found examples of similar landscape characteristics / character. | | Low | Fairly frequently found examples of similar landscape characteristics / character. | | Very Low | Commonly encountered examples of similar unremarkable landscape characteristics / character. |

Landscape Value: Conservation Interests

Ap 1.4.12 Relative ratings for this aspect are indicated in Table Ap 6:

| Value Level | Relevant Criteria | |-------------|-------------------| | Very High | Numerous and/or extensive international or nationally important features or elements of wildlife, earth science, archaeological, historical or cultural interest. | | High | Frequent (some of international or national importance) features or elements of wildlife, earth science, archaeological, historical or cultural interest. | | Medium | Some regionally or locally important features or elements of wildlife, earth science, archaeological, historical or cultural interest. | | Low | Occasional locally important features or elements of wildlife, earth science, archaeological, historical or cultural interest. | | Very Low | Few, if any, elements of wildlife, earth science, archaeological, historical or cultural interest. | Landscape Value: Tranquillity/Wildness

Ap 1.4.13 Relative ratings for this aspect are indicated in Table Ap 7:

| Value Level | Relevant Criteria | |-------------|-------------------| | Very High | Strong sense of remoteness or isolation with virtually no obvious human influences present – Relative abundance of landscape characteristics contributing to an experience of tranquillity. A Tranquil Area. | | High | Secluded parts of the landscape are wild in character, where there is a sense of remoteness or isolation. Human influences are not dominant, with settlement being sparsely distributed. Occasional minor detractors to an experience of tranquillity. | | Medium | Wildness is not a strong contributing characteristic and human influences are evident, with scattered villages and other development present, detracting from an experience of tranquillity, which would be confined to localised places. | | Low | Human presence is more dominant with a corresponding lack of wildness evident, despite some rural influences. Experience of tranquillity would be rare in this landscape. | | Very Low | Human presence in terms of people, noise, movement and development dominant such that there is an absence of tranquillity or wildness. |

Landscape Value: Associations

Ap 1.4.14 Relative ratings for this aspect are indicated in Table Ap 8:

| Value Level | Relevant Criteria | |-------------|-------------------| | Very High | Landscape strongly associated with internationally prominent people, artists or writers or internationally important well-known events in history. | | High | Landscape associated with nationally prominent people, artists or writers or nationally important well-known events in history. | | Medium | Landscape widely associated with locally prominent people, artists or writers or locally important events in history. | | Low | Landscape associated, to some, with locally prominent people, artists or writers or locally recorded but minor events in history. | | Very Low | Landscape associations limited to local knowledge of locally well-known people or local minor events only. | Landscape Value: Recreation Value

Ap 1.4.15 Relative ratings for this aspect are indicated in Table Ap 9:

| Value Level | Relevant Criteria | |-------------|-------------------| | Very High | Internationally recognised or promoted area or routes for tourism and recreational use (e.g. National Park, European Long Distance Footpath) and very well used generally recreationally by more distant visitors and local population. | | High | Nationally or regionally promoted areas of open recreation or routes for such use (e.g. country park, National Trail, Scenic Routes). Other commercial uses (e.g. golf course, fishing, boating). Generally well-used for recreation from visitors and local population. | | Medium | Open general access available or general public rights of way where appreciation of the landscape is linked to its use. Fairly well-used for recreation locally. | | Low | Permissive, informal or general access routes or land where appreciation of the landscape not a strong link to its use. Used by some of local population. | | Very Low | Access and recreational value limited or absent due to incompatible land-uses. |

Landscape Value: Agricultural Value

Ap 1.4.16 Relative ratings for this aspect are indicated in Table Ap 10:

| Value Level | Relevant Criteria | |-------------|-------------------| | Very High | Agricultural capability is typically excellent or very high (generally equivalent to ALC Grade 1 or 2) – ‘Best and Most Versatile’ (BMV) agricultural land. | | High | Agricultural capability is typically good (generally equivalent to ALC Grade 3a) – ‘Best and Most Versatile’ (BMV) agricultural land. | | Medium | Agricultural land typically of moderate quality (generally equivalent to ALC Grade 3b). | | Low | Agricultural land typically of poor quality (generally equivalent to ALC Grade 4). | | Very Low | Agricultural land is typically absent or of very poor quality (generally equivalent to ALC Grade 5). |

Landscape Value: Summary

Ap 1.4.17 The assessment of Landscape Value is undertaken as appropriate for the receiving landscape receptors (e.g. the Site, or a location within an adjacent character area) and summarised in a table (example as per Table Ap 11) and subsequently given an overall assessment of landscape value provided for the landscape receptor, with further explanation provided where required. The Overall Landscape Value in the example below would be Medium.

### Table Ap 11 Overall Landscape Value (example only)

| Value Level | Protection | Landscape Condition | Scenic Quality | Rarity | Representativeness | Conservation Interests | Tranquillity/Wildness | Associations | Recreational Value | Agricultural Value | |-------------|------------|---------------------|----------------|--------|--------------------|------------------------|-----------------------|--------------|-------------------|-------------------| | Very High | | | | | | | | | | | | High | | | | | | | | | | | | Medium | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | | | | | Low | | | | | | | | | | | | Very Low | | | | | | | | | | |

### Landscape Susceptibility

Ap 1.4.18 Susceptibility refers to the ability of landscape receptors to accommodate changes brought about by the Proposed Development. Relevant criteria are provided in Table Ap 12.

### Table Ap 12 Susceptibility to Change of Landscape Receptors

| Susceptibility | Relevant Criteria | |----------------|-------------------| | Very High | Key landscape characteristics highly susceptible to change and very difficult to replace without affecting the existing character. Strong landscape structure with many distinct characteristics worthy of conservation. | | High | Landscape characteristics susceptible to change and fairly difficult to mitigate without affecting the existing character. Typically of recognisable landscape structure and some features worthy of conservation. | | Medium | Landscape characteristics with a degree of susceptibility to change; some scope to replace these elements without adversely affecting the character. Distinguishable landscape structure, few or no features worthy of conservation; may contain occasional detracting features. | | Low | Landscape characteristics of low susceptibility to change or easily replaced and potentially enhanced. Weak landscape structure or transitional in nature; some evidence of degradation and a number of detracting features. | | Very Low | Landscape characteristics are not susceptible to change. High probability to mitigate or replace the lost elements and to enhance the existing landscape. Damaged landscape structure, evidence of severe disturbance or dereliction; detracting features dominate. |

### Assessment of Landscape Sensitivity

Ap 1.4.19 Landscape Susceptibility and Landscape Value are then assessed in combination to provide an overall rating in terms of Landscape Sensitivity, with professional judgement applied and described. Generally this follows the relationship as shown in Table Ap 13 Landscape Sensitivity

| Land. Value | Very Low | Low | Medium | High | Very High | |-------------|----------|-----|--------|------|-----------| | Very Low | Very Low | Very Low | Low | Low or Medium | Medium | | Low | Very Low | Low | Low or Medium | Medium | Medium or High | | Medium | Low | Low or Medium | Medium | Medium or High | High | | High | Low or Medium | Medium | Medium or High | High | Very High | | Very High | Medium | Medium or High | High | Very High | Very High |

Magnitude of Landscape Effects

Ap 1.4.20 The Magnitude of change is concerned with the scale of change to the landscape characteristics, the geographical extent of this change and the duration/reversibility of the changes. The magnitude of landscape effects have been categorised as follows in Table Ap 14.

Table Ap 14 Magnitude of Landscape Effects

| Magnitude of Landscape Effect | Landscape Criteria | |-------------------------------|--------------------| | Very Large | Typically, large scale changes and/or numerous changes to important landscape characteristics | | Large | Typically, large scale changes to some landscape characteristics, or a high number of medium scale changes to the landscape characteristics | | Medium | Typically, some medium scale changes to some landscape characteristics | | Small | Typically, a low number of medium scale changes to landscape characteristics, or a number of small scale changes to landscape characteristics | | Very Small | Typically, occasional, small scale changes to unimportant landscape characteristics |

Ap 1.4.21 In general, the duration weighting applied to magnitude is as follows:

- Very Long term effect: 15+ years
- Long term effect: 8 to 15 years
- Medium term effect: 3 to 8 years
- Short term effects: 1.5 to 3 years
- Temporary effect: Less than 18 months

Ap 1.4.22 Where variations between relevant criteria, duration etc. occur, reasoned professional judgement is applied and described in the assessment to determine the magnitude of effect. Nature of Landscape Effect

Ap 1.4.23 Changes to landscape characteristics can be of a positive, negative or neutral nature. The determination of the nature of effect on landscape receptors is related to the Baseline Situation and what is recognised to be either a desirable or an undesirable change (e.g. from assessments of landscape quality, landscape policy guidance). A neutral effect may occur, for example, if a characteristic element is replaced with a different but equally characteristic element. Therefore, it is possible for there to be a large magnitude of change but with a neutral effect overall.

Significance of Landscape Effects

Ap 1.4.24 The significance of a landscape effect (from an impact) is a function of the sensitivity of the affected landscape receptor, the magnitude of change and the nature of effect. While the methodology is designed to be robust and transparent, professional judgement is ultimately applied to determine the significance of each effect.

Ap 1.4.25 The degree of landscape significance is defined in Table Ap 15. These are different for beneficial and adverse effects. Generally, an effect, which is greater than a ‘Moderate’ significance, is likely to be a pertinent ‘material consideration’ in the decision-making process.

### Table Ap 15 Significance of Landscape Effects

| Significance | Adverse Landscape Effects | Beneficial Landscape Effects | |--------------|---------------------------|-----------------------------| | Negligible | Overall, typically, there may be some Small scale, Short-term impacts but virtually no lasting adverse effect on existing landscape character. | Overall, typically, there may be some Small scale Short-term positive impacts but virtually no lasting beneficial effect on existing landscape character | | Minor | Typically: Some Small-Medium scale effects on existing landscape character in poor condition. Very Small or Temporary changes to Medium sensitivity landscape. Minimal effect on landscape character. | Overall, typically, landscape character and condition is slightly improved via strengthening of some valued characteristic landscape elements for a Long-term duration, in high and Very High sensitivity landscapes where limited scope to provide improvement exists, or Some shorter duration improvements to landscapes of lower sensitivity | | Moderate | Typically: Large scale and Long term changes to landscapes and/or landscape receptor of low sensitivity. Some Medium scale changes to Medium sensitivity landscape and/or landscape receptor. Very Small or Temporary changes to highly sensitive landscape and/or landscape receptor. Noticeable effect on the landscape and/or landscape receptor without exceeding the landscape capacity threshold. | Overall, typically, landscape character and condition is improved via the introduction of characteristic landscape elements and the removal of incongruous landscape elements: Permanently and greatly in highly sensitive areas; For a number of characteristics for a Medium-Long term duration in areas of Medium landscape sensitivity; For a small number of characteristics for a Short-Medium-term duration in lower sensitivity landscapes | | Major | Typically: Numerous Long-term effects on Medium sensitivity landscape and/or landscape receptor. Small permanent effects on highly sensitivity landscape and/or landscape receptor. Landscape receptor and/or character is affected to a significant degree. | Overall, typically, landscape character and condition is significantly improved via removal of some existing incongruous landscape elements and introduction/restoration of some valued characteristic landscape elements in lower and Medium sensitivity landscapes where much scope to provide improvement exists | | Substantial | Proposals are at complete variance with many key characteristics of a very highly valued landscape. | Proposals would remove substantial numbers of existing incongruous landscape elements and introduce a number of highly desirable landscape elements to substantially restore an area of landscape character of high potential landscape value for a Very Long-term period |

5.3.3 The derivation of the level of significance (of effect) uses professional judgement taking into consideration the contributing factors of sensitivity, magnitude and nature of effect and generally follows a pattern by which the relationship between sensitivity and magnitude contributes to the level of significance as shown diagrammatically in 0. It should be noted that, strictly, notable or Significant effects only need to be determined, not the assessed level of all effects, but it is acknowledged that levels of effects can be a useful aid when reading and understanding the assessment.

**Diagram 1 General Relationship Between Magnitude, Sensitivity and Significance**

| Sensitivity: | Magnitude: | |--------------|------------| | Very Low | Very small | | | Negligible | | | Minor | | | Moderate | | | Major | | | Substantial| | Very High | Very Large |

**Ap 1.5 ASSESSMENT OF VISUAL EFFECTS**

**General**

Ap 1.5.1 Visual effects relate to the experienced changes that arise in the composition of available views due to changes in a landscape scene, and to the overall effects with respect to visual amenity. Effects are defined as the relationship between the visual sensitivity, the magnitude of change and the nature of the effect.

**Visual Sensitivity**

Ap 1.5.2 The sensitivity of the visual receptor will be influenced by the value attached to views (which is established at the baseline stage) and the susceptibility to change, in relation to the development proposed.

Ap 1.5.3 Judgements on value take into account any recognised importance of the view (e.g. in relation to valued landscapes or features, or through planning designations) and any indicators of value attached to views by visitors e.g. guidebooks and tourist maps.

Ap 1.5.4 **Susceptibility to change**, in relation to the development proposed, is influenced by the following factors:

- Location and context of the viewpoint;
- Characteristics of the view, e.g. whether it is continuous or intermittent and static or transient; and
- The activity or expectations of the receptor at the viewpoint.

Ap 1.5.5 In terms of private residential receptors, whilst it is an accepted planning principle that there is ‘no right to a view’ residents are recognised as having the potential to be particularly susceptible to changes in their visual amenity. Locations (rooms) normally used in waking or daylight hours are usually considered more sensitive than other locations.

Ap 1.5.6 The indicative terminology in Table Ap 16 was used as a guide to describe sensitivity with regard to visual receptors.

### Table Ap 16 Sensitivity of Visual Receptors

| Visual Sensitivity | Value and Susceptibility to Change Criteria | Typical Receptor Types/Locations | |--------------------|---------------------------------------------|----------------------------------| | Very High | Nationally well recognised and advertised location for high visual amenity value. Prominent location or vista with high visual amenity value that is recognised in published sources. Very high susceptibility to change as a very high level of attention focussed on the landscape and particular views. | Nationally promoted Long Distance Footpath users. Protected View recognised in planning policy designation. Visitors to nationally advertised attractions where visual amenity is very important to their enjoyment. Private views from primary living space regularly used in daylight hours where the focus is on a landscape of recognised very high value. | | High | Well-known area recognised regionally for high landscape value. Open areas of recognised public access where primary enjoyment is of the views of the landscape. High susceptibility to change as a high level of attention focussed on the landscape and particular views. | Users of local advertised circular, recreational or well-used footpath routes and open access land where primary enjoyment is from the landscape and visual amenity. Road and rail users on routes through landscapes recognised for their high scenic value. Private views from areas of a property curtilage occasionally used in daylight hours, e.g. access drives, where the focus is on the landscape beyond private curtilage. | | Medium | Locations afford views of some value, but visual amenity not well recognised beyond locality. Moderate susceptibility to change as a moderate level of attention focussed on the landscape and particular views. | General recognised public access routes (road and rail routes) with some landscape interest. Public houses, restaurants etc. where views would include some focus on the wider landscape. Views from recreational sport areas which may involve some incidental appreciation of views of the wider landscape, e.g. golf or fishing. Private views from residential properties from rooms not normally occupied in waking or daylight hours, e.g. bedrooms. | | Low | Viewpoint context and location is of lesser value than similar views from nearby visual receptors that may be more accessible. Low susceptibility to change as low level of attention focussed on the landscape and particular views. | Views from recreational sport areas which does not involve or depend upon appreciation of views of the landscape, e.g. football, rugby, speedway. Minor road routes where passengers would have limited focus on a landscape of no recognised value. People at their places of work where the main focus is not on the surrounding landscape context. | | Very Low | Viewpoint context is such that views have a very low value. Expectations of visual amenity are very low. Activity at viewpoint is incidental to the view. | People at their place of work where there the type of activity has no relationship to the surrounding landscape context. | Magnitude of Visual Effects

Ap 1.5.7 The magnitude or scale of visual change is described by reference to:

- Scale of Change;
- Geographical Extent; and
- The Duration and Reversibility of the effect.

Ap 1.5.8 The Scale of Change takes into account the loss or addition of features in the view and changes in the composition of the view including the proportion of the view occupied by the Proposed Development. The extent of contrast or integration of any new features or changes in the landscape scene with the existing or remaining landscape elements and characteristics in terms of form, scale and mass, line, height, colour and texture is also considered.

Ap 1.5.9 The Geographical Extent will vary with different viewpoints and is likely to reflect:

- The angle of view in relation to the main activity of the receptor;
- The proximity of the viewpoint to the Proposed Development; and
- The extent of the area over which the changes would be visible.

Ap 1.5.10 Viewpoint proximity to the Site was classed as follows:

- Close-range: Within 0.5km
- Medium-range: Between 0.5km and 1.5km
- Long-range: Over 1.5km

Ap 1.5.11 In general, the Duration and reversibility considerations applied to magnitude are as follows:

- Very Long term effect: 15+ years
- Long term effect: 8 to 15 years
- Medium term effect: 3 to 8 years
- Short term effects: 1.5 to 3 years
- Temporary effect: Less than 18 months

Ap 1.5.12 The terminology in Table Ap 17 was adopted for the definition of magnitude of visual effects:

### Table Ap 17 Magnitude of Visual Effects

| Magnitude of Visual Effect | Visual Criteria | |---------------------------|-----------------| | Very Large | Where the proposals become the only dominant feature in the view and to which all other elements become subordinate. Typically involves direct views at close range over a wide horizontal and vertical extent. | | Large | Where the proposals would form a significant and immediately apparent element of the scene and would affect the overall impression of the view. Typically involves direct or oblique views at close range with notable changes over the horizontal and vertical extent. | | Medium | Where proposals would form a visible and recognisable new development but where it is not intrusive within the overall view. Typically involves direct or oblique views at medium range with a moderate horizontal and/or vertical extent of the view affected. | | Small | Where proposals constitute only a minor component of the wider view, which the casual observer could miss or where awareness does not affect the overall quality of the scene. Typically involves an oblique view at medium or long range or a direct view at long range with a small horizontal/vertical extent of the view affected. | | Very Small | Where only a very small part of the development is discernible or that it is at such a distance that the effects are scarcely appreciated. |

Ap 1.5.13 Where variations between relevant criteria occur, reasoned professional judgement is applied and described in the assessment to determine the magnitude of effect.

**Nature of Visual Effect**

Ap 1.5.14 Changes to view can be of a **positive**, **negative** or **neutral** nature. The determination of the nature of effect on view is related to the Baseline Situation and what is considered to be either a desirable or an undesirable change. The assessment of the nature of visual effect focuses on what is *experienced*, although some professional judgement has (by necessity) been applied to consider the subjective matter of whether the change could generally be received by the visual receptors as positive, negative or neutral. The assumptions and judgements made are reasoned in the text.

**Significance of Visual Effects**

Ap 1.5.15 The significance of visual effects (from an impact) is a function of the sensitivity of the affected visual receptor, the magnitude of change and the nature of effect. While the methodology is designed to be robust and transparent, professional judgement is ultimately applied to determine the significance of each effect.

Ap 1.5.16 The results of the assessment have been presented by providing a brief description of the existing view from each principal representative viewpoint/receptor, followed by a description of changes to the view and the landscape scene and an analysis of the magnitude and nature of the effects.

Ap 1.5.17 The significance of visual effects is defined in Table Ap 18. These are different for beneficial and adverse effects. Generally, an effect which is of ‘Major’ significance, or above, is likely to be a pertinent ‘material consideration’ in the decision-making process.

### Table Ap 18 Significance of Visual Effects

| Significance | Adverse Visual Effects | Beneficial Visual Effects | |--------------|------------------------|---------------------------| | Negligible | Adverse effect has minimal significance due to low visual amenity even from otherwise sensitive viewpoints. Produces only very slight deterioration to views. | Beneficial effect has minimal significance due to limited scope to improve existing view even from sensitive viewpoints. Provides only very slight improvement to views. | | Minor | Typically: Large-very large scale deterioration to low sensitivity views of low quality. Small scale deterioration to lower and Medium sensitivity views of high quality. Very Small-Medium scale deterioration to higher sensitivity receptors with low existing visual amenity. | Typically: Medium scale improvements to existing views with high visual amenity and Medium sensitivity. Small scale improvements to views of low visual amenity from low sensitivity viewpoints. Very Small scale improvements to low quality high sensitivity views. | | Moderate | Typically: Noticeable Long-term or Large scale deterioration in low sensitivity but high quality views. Medium scale deterioration to Medium sensitivity high quality views and Very Large changes to low quality views. Small scale and Temporary deterioration in Highly sensitive and high amenity value views and larger scale deterioration in low quality views. | Typically: Noticeable large-scale improvement in unimportant views with low existing visual amenity and visual sensitivity. Small to Medium scale improvements to views from Medium and High sensitivity viewpoints with low existing visual amenity. Very Small scale improvements in existing low visual amenity from Very High sensitivity viewpoints. | | Major | Typically: Medium scale deterioration in High sensitivity, high quality views, or larger scale deterioration in High sensitivity but lower quality views. Small scale deterioration to higher sensitivity views of high quality. Considerable Long-term deterioration in Medium sensitivity views of high amenity value. | Typically: Large to Very Large scale improvements at Medium to High sensitivity locations. Medium to Large scale improvements to High sensitivity viewpoints with low existing visual amenity. | | Substantial | Clear and obvious Very Large-scale adverse changes resulting in considerable and Long-term deterioration in Highly sensitive and important views. | Clear and obvious very large scale changes resulting in considerable and Long-term improvement in existing poor view for High sensitivity receptors. |

5.3.4 The derivation of the level of significance (of effect) uses professional judgement taking into consideration the contributing factors of sensitivity, magnitude and nature of effect and generally follows a pattern by which the relationship between sensitivity and magnitude contributes to the level of significance as shown diagrammatically in Diagram 2. It should be noted that, strictly, notable or Significant effects only need to be determined, not the assessed level of all effects, but it is acknowledged that levels of effects can be a useful aid when reading and understanding the assessment. Diagram 2 General Relationship Between Magnitude, Sensitivity and Significance

Ap 1.6 ASSESSMENT OF CUMULATIVE EFFECTS

General

Ap 1.6.1 The cumulative landscape and visual effects of two or more developments may be more or less than the sum of the individual effects and therefore may need to be assessed in addition to the assessment of effects of the Proposed Development undertaken in isolation of other similar developments.

Ap 1.6.2 The assessment of cumulative effects may require different baseline assumptions to be made, to allow the assessment to differentiate between isolated and cumulative effects.

Ap 1.6.3 Cumulative effects may take into account:

- Other existing (recently built or partially built) developments;
- Other approved developments that have not yet been built;
- Other proposals awaiting determination of approval or are reasonably foreseeable.

Ap 1.6.4 The assessment of cumulative effects process remains the same as for the individual assessment and the same terminology (supplemented below) can be applied.

Cumulative Visual Effects

Ap 1.6.5 Cumulative visual effects can be gained in combination (i.e. where two or more similar developments are visible from one viewpoint) and sequentially (i.e. when two or more similar developments are visible from different viewpoints along a route (e.g. a railway line, recognised tourist route or recreational footpath). Cumulative visual effects can be further categorised as described in Table Ap 1. Table Ap 19 Categorisation of Cumulative Effects

| Cumulative Visual Effect | Sub-type of Effect | Description | |--------------------------|-------------------|-------------| | Combined Effect | Simultaneous | Two or more developments visible from one viewpoint in field of view gained from looking in one direction | | | Successive | Two or more developments visible from one viewpoint only by changing orientation of viewing direction (i.e. by turning round) | | Sequential Effect | Frequently sequential | Where similar visual effects are experienced along a route, from different viewpoints separated by short distances or short time gaps (e.g. along a motorway) | | | Occasionally sequential | Where similar visual effects are experienced along a route, from different viewpoints separated by large distances or long time gaps (e.g. along a long distance footpath) |

Ap 1.6.6 A cumulative perceived effect may occur due to a receptors’ knowledge of developments’ proximity to one another, even though they may not be visible.

Cumulative Landscape Effects

Ap 1.6.7 Cumulative landscape effects can occur in relation to landscape elements individually and also in combination (landscape character). The cumulative effects on landscape character take into account the wider area and the potential effects of other listed developments. Appendix 2 FIGURES Appendix 3 LANDSCAPE GUIDELINES

## Landscape guidelines

### White Peak

#### Protect

| Protect the strongly nucleated settlement pattern of villages and scattered farms | Limestone Village | Limestone Plateau | Limestone Hills & Slopes | Limestone Dales | |---|---|---|---|---| | Protect and maintain the historic field pattern | Limestone Village | Limestone Plateau | Limestone Hills & Slopes | Limestone Dales | | Protect and maintain historic drystone walls | Limestone Village | Limestone Plateau | Limestone Hills & Slopes | Limestone Dales | | Protect and maintain historic field barns | Limestone Village | Limestone Plateau | Limestone Hills & Slopes | Limestone Dales |

#### Manage

| Manage and enhance surviving areas of natural landscapes | Limestone Village | Limestone Plateau | Limestone Hills & Slopes | Limestone Dales | |---|---|---|---|---| | Enhance the diversity of agricultural grassland | Limestone Village | Limestone Plateau | Limestone Hills & Slopes | Limestone Dales | | Manage traditional plantation woodlands | Limestone Village | Limestone Plateau | Limestone Hills & Slopes | Limestone Dales | | Manage and enhance woodlands | Limestone Village | Limestone Plateau | Limestone Hills & Slopes | Limestone Dales | | Manage and enhance linear tree cover and amenity trees | Limestone Village | Limestone Plateau | Limestone Hills & Slopes | Limestone Dales | | Manage the network of tracks and footpaths to maximise opportunities to enjoy the landscape | Limestone Village | Limestone Plateau | Limestone Hills & Slopes | Limestone Dales | | Manage the network of minor roads to maintain character and local access | Limestone Village | Limestone Plateau | Limestone Hills & Slopes | Limestone Dales | | Manage historic mineral landscapes | Limestone Village | Limestone Plateau | Limestone Hills & Slopes | Limestone Dales |

#### Plan

| Create areas of limestone grassland and heath | Limestone Village | Limestone Plateau | Limestone Hills & Slopes | Limestone Dales | |---|---|---|---|---| | Create new native broadleaved woodland | Limestone Village | Limestone Plateau | Limestone Hills & Slopes | Limestone Dales | | Develop appropriate landscapes from mineral workings | Limestone Village | Limestone Plateau | Limestone Hills & Slopes | Limestone Dales | | Develop small-scale renewable energy for local needs | Limestone Village | Limestone Plateau | Limestone Hills & Slopes | Limestone Dales |

- This is a priority throughout the landscape character type
- This is a priority in some parts of the landscape character type, often associated with particular conditions/features
- This is not a priority but may be considered in some locations
- This will generally be inappropriate in this landscape character type Landscape guidelines explanation

Protect

Protect the strongly nucleated settlement pattern of villages and scattered farms

The character of the White Peak is typified by the historic pattern and distinctive vernacular style of its small limestone villages. In order to maintain the integrity of the historic fabric, character and setting of settlements and buildings, new development and conversions should respond positively to the historical settlement pattern, density, local materials and building traditions. Traditional buildings are an important feature and their renovation and maintenance should be encouraged. Locating new agricultural buildings can also impact on landscape character and opportunities should be taken to guide site selection.

Protect and maintain historic drystone walls

Drystone walls, and associated features such as gateposts, are an important historic feature in the limestone landscapes of the White Peak. In places the standard of walls is declining and there is a need to enhance their maintenance.

Protect and maintain historic field barns

Traditional farm buildings are of significant value to the character of the landscape and it is important to maintain the fabric and appearance of such buildings. Isolated field barns are a special cultural feature in the White Peak, especially in the Plateau Pastures. Where they can no longer be maintained in agricultural use, careful consideration needs to be given to appropriate alternatives. Changes to the appearance of either the building or its surroundings should be avoided, especially where these are not in keeping with the rural character of the landscape. Conversion to residential use would be particularly inappropriate in a region where settlement is strongly nucleated in small villages.

Protect and maintain the historic field pattern

Field pattern is a prominent feature in the Limestone Village Farmlands and Plateau Pastures, reflecting the historic character of these landscapes. It is important that these field patterns are protected, particularly in the Limestone Village Farmlands where the enclosure reflects the earlier, Medieval, open field system. Where the field pattern has become fragmented through the removal of field boundaries it is important to avoid further loss and to look for opportunities to restore primary boundaries along highways, footpaths and farm and parish boundaries.

Lathkill Dale © Peak District National Park Authority Manage

Manage and enhance surviving areas of natural landscapes

Extensive areas of semi-natural grassland and more localised patches of heath are landscape features of the Limestone Dales and Limestone Hills & Slopes. These areas support diverse plant and animal communities and they should be conserved as a priority. Lack of grazing has resulted in some areas reverting to scrub and woodland. There is a need to identify areas that are a priority for scrub clearance and others where retention of scrub or woodland regeneration will be more appropriate and will provide habitat diversity. Appropriate grazing and scrub control should be carried out as a priority to maintain a mosaic of diverse landscapes whilst respecting cultural heritage.

Enhance the diversity of agricultural grassland

Many of the enclosed grasslands in the Limestone Village Farmlands and Plateau Pastures have been improved and reseeded with a consequent loss of species and visual diversity. There is a need to manage these pastures in a more sustainable way that restores or conserves species diversity whilst supporting productive agriculture. Opportunities to extend and enhance the management of unimproved pastures should also be sought, particularly in the Limestone Village Farmlands.

Manage traditional plantation woodlands

In the Limestone Village Farmlands and Plateau Pastures there are linear or rectangular shelterbelts and groups of trees around farmsteads and settlements, and on the site of old lead mine workings. These are often not managed and suffering from dereliction. Opportunities should be sought to ensure their continuity, enhance diversity and improve woodland productivity, whilst conserving cultural heritage features. There may be opportunities to link woodland management to local wood fuel schemes and reduce reliance on traditional carbon-based energies. To mitigate new development, new plantation woodlands may be appropriate in localised areas where they maintain or enhance existing landscape character. Increased woodland cover creates areas of shelter and shade, and may be useful for mitigating the impacts of climate change.

Manage and enhance woodlands

Larger woodlands are only a feature in the Limestone Dales, where there is a mixture of both ancient and secondary woods. Many of these woods are neglected or would benefit from enhanced management. Some have been recently managed under the Ravine WoodLIFE Project, and further opportunities should be sought to increase diversity and improve woodland productivity whilst conserving cultural heritage features. Plantation woodlands in the Limestone Dales should be managed to create a more semi-natural structure and composition, and extended through natural regeneration. There may be opportunities to link woodland management to local wood fuel schemes and reduce reliance on traditional carbon-based energies. A balance will need to be reached between woodland expansion and the retention of important open landscapes and vistas.

Manage and enhance linear tree cover and amenity trees

Individual and groups of linear boundary trees are important landscape features in localised areas of the Limestone Plateau Pastures, e.g. along existing and historic transport routes. There is a need to manage these trees to ensure a balanced age structure whilst seeking opportunities, where appropriate, to extend and replace boundary trees. Individual or groups of trees within settlements also contribute significantly to village landscapes. These should be managed to ensure their continuity whilst addressing health and safety issues and residents’ amenity.

Manage the network of tracks and footpaths to maximise opportunities to enjoy the landscape

The network of tracks and footpaths should be managed to maximise opportunities for healthy recreation and to enjoy the landscape. This can be achieved easily by landscape management measures such as surfacing, and by controlling inappropriate use to retain the character, cultural heritage and biodiversity interests.

Manage the network of minor roads to maintain character and local access

The network of minor roads should be managed to maintain their local, small-scale and rural character to ensure good local access whilst discouraging inappropriate driving. Verges and cultural features should be maintained and enhanced, and the impact of signage minimised. Manage historic mineral landscapes

An important characteristic feature which runs throughout all landscape character types are the historic mineral workings, particularly the remains of lead working. Landscapes associated with historic mineral extraction should be retained and managed, including, where appropriate, providing interpretation of their history.

Plan

Create areas of limestone grassland and heath

Since the 1940s the trend in agriculture has been towards more intensive farming methods. This trend has been especially marked on the poorer land of the Limestone Hills & Slopes. To a lesser extent this has also occurred in the Limestone Dales, where patches of formerly rough land have been converted to improved pasture. This has resulted in a gradual decline in the diversity of the region, including the loss of many cultural heritage features. There are opportunities to create extensive areas of unenclosed limestone grassland and heath, and to extend and link existing patches, particularly within the Limestone Hills & Slopes, by natural regeneration and creation. In places, there may be localised opportunities to create grassland or heathland habitats above dale brows in the Limestone Village Farmlands and Plateau Pastures areas. Expansion should not occur where this would adversely impact on cultural heritage features and historic landscapes.

Create new native broadleaved woodland

There are localised opportunities to extend woodland cover, without affecting cultural heritage and biodiversity features and historic landscapes, within the Limestone Hills & Slopes. There are opportunities to extend woodland by natural regeneration and by planting, although a balance will need to be reached between woodland expansion and the retention of limestone grassland/heath and scrub. In places there may be localised opportunities to extend Limestone Dales woodland over the dale brow into the Limestone Village Farmlands and Plateau Pastures. This should be done where it would not adversely impact on important cultural heritage features and historic landscapes. Increased woodland cover creates areas of shelter and shade and may be useful for mitigating the impacts of climate change.

Develop appropriate landscapes from mineral workings

Parts of the White Peak have been heavily influenced by vein mineral extraction and limestone quarrying, with large active quarries in the Limestone Hills & Slopes and Limestone Plateau Pastures. Modern mineral workings should be restored to maximise visual amenity, biodiversity, recreational, educational and heritage value. The aim should be to use the land to create semi-natural landscapes, which blend into the surrounding landscape.

Develop small-scale renewable energy for local needs

There are localised opportunities for the development of water power, solar power, local wood fuel supplies, anaerobic digestion and other renewable energy sources. Opportunities should be sought within new development and management of woodland to increase local renewable energy supply, where it would have a neutral impact on the character of the area and its component parts. Where appropriate seek positive measures to reinforce the local landscape character as part of the new development. Outline of residual landform beyond retained trees Removal of woodland and lowering of tip (restored land beyond)

Approx. limit of retained trees

VIEWPOINT 7: 630m south-southeast of site boundary on public footpath no. FP2 (Limestone Way Long Distance Bridleway). Photograph viewing distance 320mm. Horizontal FOV 71°

VIEWPOINT 7: (showing wider context). Photograph viewing distance 160mm FOV 143°

Notes:

- Camera: Canon EOS 5D
- Focal Length: 24mm
- Date: 17/02/2014
- FOV given to nearest whole degree.

Viewing distance indicates distance for image to both eyes to represent approximate scale of features within the photograph as would be seen by the naked eye. This is a visual aid only.

Note: photographs will never exactly replicate an individual's view with the naked eye. This is a visual aid only.

Crestwood Environmental Ltd 1000 High Street Preston Business Park Preston PR2 2SH Tel: 01772 555555 info@crestwoodenvironmental.co.uk http://www.crestwoodenvironmental.co.uk

Lafarge Tarmac

Client: Crestwood Environmental Ltd

Drawing Title: BALLIDON QUARRY

VIEWPOINT 7

Date: 3/6/2015 Scale: 1:25,000 Paper Size: A3 (420x297mm)

Drawn By: [Signature] Checked By: [Signature] Status: Final

File No.: CE-BD0750-DV05 - Final (Fig.10) Background woodland on tip to be removed, lowering skyline.